DGCePTIONINPLAUTUS 


HGLGN  e.  WIGAND 


I  LIBRARY 

I  UNIVERSITY  OF 

I  CALIFORNIA 

!  SAN  DIEGO       -. 


1 


pA 

.C58 


Digitized  by  tlie  Internet  Arcliive 

in  2007  witli  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.archive.org/details/deceptioninplautOOcoleiala 


/22«r2^ 


DECEPTION  IN 
PLAUTUS 

A    STUDY    IN    THE 
TECHNIQUE     OF     ROMAN     COMEDY 

BY 

HELEN    E.   WIEAND 


'.ARTIer\A6RlTATl1 


BOSTON 

RICHARD  G.  BADGER 

THE  GORHAM   PRESS 


Copyright,  1920,  by  Richard  G.  Badger 


All  Rights  Reserved 


Made  in  the  United  States  of  America 


The  Gorham  Press,  Boston,  U.  S.  A. 


INTRODUCTION 


From  the  time  of  Ritschl's  critical  work  upon 
the  comedies  of  Plautus  (1848)  to  the  present, 
one  of  the  chief  desires  of  students  of  Plautus 
has  been  to  solve  the  problem  of  the  Plautine  and 
un-Plautine  elements  in  the  comedies.  The  ex- 
istence of  un-Plautine  elements  is  quite  evident 
from  the  clear  traces  of  revision  which  the 
parallel  versions  in  the  manuscripts  show.  Very 
little  comparative  study  of  all  the  plays  has  been 
made,  combining  minute  internal  analysis  of  the 
plot  of  each  play  and  a  study  of  all  its  features, 
internal  as  well  as  external,  with  a  comparison  of 
similar  features  in  the  other  plays;  for  as  Lan- 
gen  pointed  out,^  too  often  the  conclusions  as  to 
Plautine  technique  have  been  drawn  from  the 
minute  analysis  of  single  plays,  instead  of  from 
such  comparative  studies. 

It  is  because  we  feel  that  such  a  study  can  make 
a  definite  contribution  to  the  solution  of  the  prob- 
lem of  the  Plautinity  of  the  plays  that  we  have 
undertaken  it.  For  this  purpose  even  a  very 
cursory  reading  of  the  plays  suggested  the  ele- 
ment of  deception  as  one  occurring  in  a  sufficient 
number  of  the  comedies  to  serve  as  a  basis  for 

1  Flauttnische  Studlen,  Preface. 

3 


4  INTRODUCTION 

the  study.  Moreover  the  prominence  of  that 
element  in  many  of  the  comedies  is  striking. 

An  analysis,  then,  of  the  comedies  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  plot  of  deception,  with  a  con- 
sideration of  the  general  situation  within  that 
plot,  of  the  characters  involved  in  it,  both  the 
tricksters  and  the  persons  tricked  and  the  assist- 
ants engaged  to  carry  out  the  stratagems,  of  the 
object  and  nature  of  the  deception,  will,  at  least, 
be  worth  while  for  a  surer  appreciation  of  Plau- 
tus  himself.  A  study  of  the  technique  of  the  plot 
of  deception,  the  methods  employed  in  carrying 
it  out,  and  the  interrelation  of  the  plans  laid  for 
the  trickery  and  the  execution  of  those  plans, 
naturally  involves  a  study  of  the  Greek  originals 
of  Plautus. 

It  is  hoped  that  this  investigation  will  help  to 
determine  whether  it  is  true  of  this  device,  as  of 
anagnorisis,  that  it  "does  not  seem  that  a  single 
element  essential  to  an  intrigue,  a  single  feature 
of  the  physiognomy  of  a  character  is  thoroughly, 
necessarily,  irreducibly  Roman."^ 

At  least  it  is  hoped  that  some  light  may  be 
thrown  upon  Plautus'  relation  to  his  sources,  the 
use  that  he  made  of  those  sources,  and  the  fate 
of  his  plays  at  the  hands  of  those  who  presented 
them  in  later  times. 

2  Legrand:  Daos,  p.  53. 


CONTENTS 

Chapter  Fag» 

Introduction        3 

I    The  prominence  of  deception   as 

AN    ELEMENT    IN    THE   COMEDIES    OF 

Plautus     9 

II    Analysis   of    the   Bacchides    and 

COMPARISON   OF  THE  COMEDIES    .        .  l6 

A     General  situation     ...       26 
B    Characters — especially    the 
trickster    and   his    assis- 
tants      32 

C    Object  and  nature  of  de- 
ception       44 

III  Technique  of  Deception     ...       52 

A    Methods 52 

B    Inter-relation  of  plans  and 

completed    action      .     .       64 
C    Special  details    .     .     .     .     136 

IV  Application   of  Facts  to  Higher 

Cri-ticism, — i.e.  to  contaminatio 

AND   RETRACTATIO 145 

V    Sources  of  the  Element  of  Decep- 
tion       i68 

Bibliography 193 

5 


DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 


DECEPTION  IN  PLAUTUS 


CHAPTER  I 


The  Prominence  of  Deception  as  an  Element 
IN  the  Comedies  of  Plautus 

"DEFORE  entering  upon  a  detailed  examina- 
-■-'  tion  of  the  comedies  of  Plautus  in  order  to 
study  minutely  the  elements  which  make  up  the 
feature  of  deception  it  is  necessary  to  state  a  fact 
which  is  evident  from  even  the  most  cursory  read- 
ing of  the  plays,  namely,  that  deception  appears  in 
varying  degrees  of  importance.  In  that  respect 
the  plays  fall  into  three  groups : 

(i)  Those  in  which  deception  is  the  chief  in- 
terest 

(2)  Those  in  which  deception  is  an  important 

but  not  the  chief  feature 

(3)  Those  in  which  deception  is  almost  or  en- 

tirely lacking. 

From  the  broadest  point  of  view 

Class  I  would  include  the  Asinaria,  Bacchides, 
Captivi,  Casina,  Curculio,  Epidicus,  Mercator, 
Miles,  Mostellaria,  Persa,  Poenulus,  Pseudolus, 

9 


lo  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Trinummus,  all  of  which  Leo^  classes  as  plays  of 
intrigue,  and  also  the  Menaechmi  and  Amphitruo. 

Class  2  would  include  the  Rudens  and  Trucu- 
lentus. 

Class  3  would  include  the  Stichus  and  Aulu- 
laria. 

In  most  instances  it  is  sufficient  to  quote  a  line 
or  two  to  substantiate  this  classification.  The 
plays  of  Class  i  naturally  furnish  the  principal 
material  for  a  study  of  the  technique  of  decep- 
tion, though  the  plays  of  Class  2  are  of  consider- 
able importance. 

In  substantiation  then  of  our  classification,  for 
Class  I  cf. 

Asin.^  vv.i02f.     Fabricare       quiduis,       quiduis 
comminiscere : 
Perficito    argentum    hodie    ut 
habeat  filius 

and  V.95     Nisi  quid  tu  porro  uxorem  de- 
f  rudaueris  ? 

Here  the  whole  play  centres  in  the  effort  on  the 
part  of  the  slave  to  carry  out  his  master's  instruc- 
tions in  this  matter. 

Bacch.  w.232f.     Inde      ego       hodie      aliquam 
machinabor  machinam 
Vnde   aurum   efficiam   amanti 
erili  filio. 

This  is  the  key-note  to  the  whole  play. 

1  Plautinische  Forschungen,  2d  ed.,  p.  209. 

2  Text  of  Qoetz-Schoell  (edltlo  minor)  used  in  citations. 


THE  PROMINENCE  OF  DECEPTION     ii 

Capt.  w.39ff.     Huius  illic,  hie  illius  hodie  fert 

imaginem. 
Et  hie  hodie  expediet  hane  docte 

fallaeiam 
Et  suom  erum  faciet  libertatis 

compotem : 

Here  master  and  slave  have  exchanged  roles  for 
purposes  of  deception. 

Cas.  vv.5of.     Nunc  sibi  uterque  contra  legiones 
parat 
Paterque     filiusque      clam     alter 
alterum. 

V.277    Ly.  .   .   .  subolet  hoc  iam  uxori, 
quod  ego  machinor: 

V.301     Cha.     .     .     machinare     quidlubet 
quouis  modo. 

Here  the  two  rivals  for  Casina's  affection  en- 
deavour to  outwit  each  other. 

Cure.  vv.329ff.  The  entire  act  wherein  the 
parasite  Curculio  relates  how  he  cheated  the  sol- 
dier of  his  ring  at  gambling  and  prepares  for  the 
subsequent  deceit. 

Cure.  vv.369f.    Tu     tabellas     consignato,     hie 
ministrabit,  ego  edam. 
Dicam   quern   ad   modum   con- 
scribas.  .  .  . 

Epid.  vv.i4if.,  w.i5if.  and 
Merc.  w.33iff.,  w.48sf. 


12  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

show  the  pretense  and  counter-pretense  between 
Demipho  and  his  son  Charinus  in  their  desire  to 
gain  possession  of  the  ancilla.  A  need  for  such 
planning  and  determination  to  gain  their  ends  by 
deceit  is  indicated  in  the  play. 

Miles  VV.147,  153,  237  contain  definite  an- 
nouncement of  trickery. 

Most.  vv.427f .  Tranio  meets  all  the  difficulties 
which  confront  him  throughout  the  play,  as  he 
does  the  first  one,  by  deceit. 

Persa  vv.i48f.  The  leno  is  the  butt  of  the 
plans  of  the  slave  in  the  Persa  as  v. 52  dum 
excoxero  lenoni  fmalam  indicates. 

Poen.  V.193;  vv.20of.  Careful  planning  is  re- 
sorted to  in  the  Poenulus. 

Pseud.  V.19;  vv.iOQf.     Pseudolus  puts  all  his 

powers  of  invention  at  the  disposal  of  his  master. 

Trin.     Up  to  Act  III  3  there  is  no  trickery 

in  the  play,  but  a  mere  family  plot :  a  young  man 

betrothing  his  sister  to  a  friend.     The  desire  of 

the  girl's  guardian  to  provide  a  dowry  for  her 

from  a  hidden  treasure  belonging  to  her  father, 

without  revealing  either  to  the  girl  or  to  her 

brother  the  source  of  the  money,  leads  to  the 

plan  which  in  vv.765ff.  is  outlined  and  attempted, 

but  is  thwarted  by  the  unexpected  return  of  the 

father  himself. 

\        In  each  of  these  thirteen  plays,  therefore,  some 

I    character  voices  his  express  intention  of  playing 

j    some  trick  or  of  forming  some  plan  to  the  undo- 

(    ing  of  some  other  character.     In  other  words,  the 

1    trickery  is  the  result  of  conscious  purpose  on  the 


THE  PROMINENCE  OF  DECEPTION    13 

part  of  the  trickster.  This  is  also  true  of  the 
Amphitruo ;  for  the  play,  though  it  differs  from 
the  other  plays  in  tone  and  character  and  in  the 
plane  upon  which  the  action  takes  place,  is  still 
an  exposition  of  the  intentional  deception  on  the 
part  of  Jupiter  against  Amphitruo, 

V.I  1 5     Sed  ita  adsimulauit  se  quasi  Amphitruo 
siet. 

Jupiter  becomes  the  intriguing  human  lover  and 
Mercury  the  tricky  slave. 

In  the  Menaechmi  is  found  a  somewhat  simi- 
lar theme  in  the  confusion  between  the  identity 
of  the  twin  brothers,  when  the  brother  from  Syra- 
cuse arrives  in  Epidamnus,  in  search  of  his  long- 
lost  brother. 

vv.69f f.     Nunc  ille  geminus  qui  Syracusis  habet 
Hodie  in  Epidamnum  uenit  cum  seruo 

suo 
Hunc  quaeritatum  geminum  germanum 

suom. 

But  the  subsequent  misunderstandings  are  the 
result  of  accident,  i.  e.  the  deception  is  not  the 
result  of  conscious  effort  but  of  circumstance. 

In  both  the  Amphitruo  and  the  Menaechmi, 
then,  there  is,  apart  from  the  pathetic  interest, 
(cf.  the  Captivi  and  the  Rudens)  the  comic  in- 
terest centering  in  the  deception.  From  the 
spectators'  point  of  view,  all  the  plays  having 
anagnorisis  possess  the  same  kind  of  interest. 


14  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

since  the  spectators  know  (when  they  have  been 
told!)  that  certain  characters  are  deceived  as  to 
each  other's  identity, — a  sort  of  unconscious  per- 
sonation. But  the  interest,  at  least  in  the 
Menaechmi,  is  of  a  different  sort  from  that  in  the 
other  plays  of  Class  i. 

To  some  extent  deception  enters  into  the  plot 
of  the  plays  of  Class  2,  but  as  has  been  indicated, 
it  is  not  in  them  the  chief  interest  and  has  no 
intimate  connection  with  the  main  object, — the 
securing  of  the  girl.  In  the  Rudens  the  trickery, 
within  the  play,  comes  into  the  scene  about  the 
rudens  where  Labrax  endeavours  to  fool  Gripus; 
also  in  vv.  938f f.,  between  Gripus  and  Trachalio. 
The  Cistellaria  and  the  Vidularia  are  plays  end- 
ing in  an  anagnorisis,  but  both  are  too  fragment- 
ary to  afford  material  for  study.  In  the  Truculen- 
tus  the  deception  entered  into  by  the  meretrix, 
that  the  borrowed  child  is  hers  and  her  lover's, 
is  of  secondary  importance  to  the  plot. 

Of  the  two  plays  in  Class  3,  the  Aulularia  con- 
tains trickery  to  a  slight  degree.  Strobilus  de- 
termines to  outwit  Euclio,  where  the  latter  at- 
tempts to  conceal  the  aula, 

vv.66if.     Emortuom  ego  me  mauelim  leto  male 
Quam  non  ego  illi  dem  hodie  insidias 
seni. 

The  completeness  of  the  plot  of  the  Stichus 
has  been  questioned.^     But  whatever  the  original 

3  Leo:  G.  G.  N;  1902,  pp.375ff.;  Plaut.  Forsch.  pp.l68f.; 
Liangen:  Plautlnlsche  Studlen,  pp.213(f.;  Teuffel:  Studlen 
und  Charakteristlken,  pp.S40fl.;  Legrand:  Daos,  p.377;  380. 


THE  PROMINENCE  OF  DECEPTION    15 

plot  may  have  been,  in  its  present  form  at  least  it 
contains  no  elements  of  trickery. 

Of  the  nineteen  plays,  therefore,  which  are 
complete,  we  find  that  all  but  the  Stichus  contain 
trickery  of  some  kind  or  other,  employed  for 
various  reasons,  either  intentionally  or  uninten- 
tionally. An  examination  of  the  nature  of  that 
deception  will  necessarily  throw  some  light  upon 
Plautus'  methods  in  using  that  feature  so  gen- 
erally in  his  plots. 


CHAPTER  II 

Analysis  of  the  Bacchides  and  Comparison 
OF  THE  Comedies 

TNASMUCH  as  the  Bacchides  contains  a  large 
-■■  amount  of  trickery  and  is  in  other  respects 
typical  of  the  plays  of  Plautus,^  we  have  selected 
it  as  a  norm  and  basis  of  comparison  in  the  exam- 
ination of  the  various  elements  which  enter  into 
deception  in  the  plays.  An  analysis  of  it,  then, 
and  a  classification  of  the  various  features  found 
in  it  will  supply  a  means  of  testing  the  other 
comedies.  The  resulting  resemblances  and  simi- 
larities will  serve  to  bring  about  a  clearer  under- 
standing of  the  technique  of  Plautus;  or  if  vari- 
ations and  dissimilarities  appear  more  numerous 
than  resemblances  it  may  still  be  possible  to  de- 
termine whether  the  method  of  the  poet  was  hap- 
hazard or  purposely  varied. 

The  essential  features  may  be  grouped  under 
the  following  headings : 

A.  General  Situation 

B.  Characters, — especially  the  trickster   and 

his  assistants 

C.  Object  and  Nature  of  deception 

1  cf,  F.  Leo:  Der  Monolog  In  Drama,  Abhandl,  d,  KOnig, 
Gesell,   GOtt,  1908,  N.  F.  X  No.   5,  p. 55. 

i6 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      17 

Analysis  of  the  Bacchides: 

The  object  of  the  trickery  in  this  play  is  to  se- 
cure money  to  free  a  meretrix  from  the  claims  of 
a  soldier, 

V.46    Nam  si  haec  habeat  aurum  quod  illi  renu- 

meret, 
and  V.44    Vt  reuehatur  domum,  cf.  also 
V.I 04    Vt  hie  iccipias  potius  aurum  quam  hinc 

eas  cum  milite. 

This  state  of  affairs  is  outlined  in  Act  I  i, 
where  the  Bacchides,  sisters  and  meretrices,  v.39, 
enlist  the  sympathies  of  Pistoclerus,  a  youth,  to 
free  one  of  them  from  a  soldier,  vv.  44f.  above, 
who  has  paid  for  her  services  but  who  will  be 
willing  to  release  her  if  money  is  found  to  repay 
him,  v.46  above.     He  will  appear  soon, 

V.47    lam  hie,  credo,  aderit, 

hence  the  need  of  immediate  action.  Incidental- 
ly the  miles  will  not  suspect  Pistoclerus  as  he 
will  take  him  for  a  lover  of  the  sister,^ 

V.61     Et  ille  adueniens  tuam  med  esse  amicam 
suspicabitur. 

After  some  apparent  hesitation,  Pistoclerus  con- 
sents, 

2  cf .   Terence:  Heauton  Timorumenos,  w.332f. 


i8  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

V.93     Tuos  sum,  tibi  dedo  operam. 

That  he  is  working  in  the  interests  of  a  friend 
and  not  in  his  own  is  clear  from 

V.60    Tu  prohibebis  et  eadem  opera  tuo  sodali 

operam  dabis 
and    from   v.  103    Tibi   nunc   operam    dabo    de 

Mnesilocho,  soror, 

where  the  name  of  the  friend  is  given.  That 
Pistoclerus  may  himself,  however,  be  involved  is 
hinted  in  his  reply  to  the  rebukes  of  his  paeda- 
gogus  Lydus,  v.  138,  in  the  following  scene. 

v.  145     Ly.     Tu    amicam    habebis?     Pi.     Quom 
videbis,  turn  scies. 

Except  for  the  statement  of  the  situation  aris- 
ing from  Pistoclerus'  efforts  in  his  friend's  be- 
half the  scene  has  no  connection  with  the  trickery. 

Chrysalus'  monologue,  which  follows,^  serves 
to  give  the  connection  between  the  three  princi- 
pal characters  of  the  play,  Mnesilochus,  Pisto- 
clerus and  Bacchis, 

vv.i75ff.     .    .    .    sodalem    .... 

Mnesilochi  Pistoclerum,  quem  ad  epis- 

tulam 
Mnesilochus    misit    super    amica    Bac- 

chide, 

3  Leo:  Der  Monolog,  op.  cit.  p. 49. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      19 

and  to  state  the  absence  of  Mnesilochus,  attend- 
ed by  Chrysalus,  from  Athens  for  the  past  two 
years, 

vv.i7of biennio 

Postquam  hinc  in  Ephesum  abii. 

In  Act  II  2,  Chrysalus  meets  Pistoclerus  who 
is  just  coming  out  of  the  Bacchides'  house,  v.204. 
Replying  to  Chrysalus'  query  as  to  his  success  in 
finding  the  lost  arnica  of  his  friend 

VV.191     Quia,  si  ilia  inuentast ualet 

195     Sed  tu  quid  factitasti  mandatis  super? 

Pistoclerus  explains  the  state  of  affairs  and  the 
need  of  money  without  delay. 

vv.22of.     Nam  istoc  fortasse  aurost  opus.       Pi. 
Philippeo  quidem. 
Ch,     Atque  eo  fortasse  iam  opust.    Pi. 
Immo  etiam  prius: 

Pistoclerus  thereupon  enlists  the  slave's  help  to 
get  the  money.     The  latter  promises  to  do  so, 

V.227      ....  ego  hie  curabo, 

and  to  that  end  assures  Pistoclerus  that  he  will 
concoct  a  plan, 

V.232     Inde     ego     hodie    aliquam    machinabor 
machinam ; 


20  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

for  the  money  is  at  hand  and  he  need  only  invent 
some  means  of  appropriating  it, 

vv.229ff.     Negotium  hoc   ad  me  adtinet  aura- 

rium. 
Mille   et  ducentos   Philippum  attuli- 

mus  aureos 
Epheso,    quos    hospes   debuit   nostro 

seni: 
Inde    .    .     .    etc. 

Meeting  Nicobulus,  Mnesilochus'  father,  on  the 
way  to  the  harbour  to  obtain  news  of  his  mer- 
chant ship  and  his  son,  Chrysalus  seizes  this  op- 
portunity to  "fleece"  the  old  man,* 

V.239     Extexam  ego  ilium  pulcre  iam,  .  .  . 

He  tells  the  story  of  their  journey,  the  attack 
upon  them  by  a  pirate-ship,  vv.28of f.,  the  escape 
back  to  Ephesus  and  the  depositing  of  the  money 
there  at  the  shrine,  in  the  care  of  the  sacerdos^ 
vv.305ff.  But  Nicobulus  can  get  it  at  any  time. 
The  old  man's  reluctance  to  make  a  voyage  at  his 
time  of  life, 

vv.342f.     Censebam  me  effugisse   a  uita  mari- 
tuma 
Ne    nauigarem    tandem    hoc    aetatis 
senex, 


4  cf .    Terence:    Heauton   Timorumenos,    vv.329ff.;    470f. ; 
512f. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      21 

indicates  his  full  acceptance  of  all  Chrysalus' 
statements.  Chrysalus'  concern  as  to  what  will 
happen 

V.358     .     .     .     .     quom  hoc  senex  resciuerit? 

in  spite  of  his  satisfaction  that  he  has  left  the 
field  open  for  Mnesilochus  to  help  himself  to  the 
money, 

vv.352f,    Ita  feci,  ut  auri  quantum  uellet  sume- 
ret, 
Quantum    autem    lubeat    reddere,    ut 
reddat  patri, 

indicates  clearly  that  the  whole  story  is  a  lie, 

V.350    Exorsa  haec  tela  non  male  omnino  mihist. 

In  other  words  the  first  trick,  by  lying,  has  suc- 
ceeded.    This  is  also  indicated  by  Mnesilochus, 

V.392     GDndigne    is    quam    techinam    de    auro 
aduorsum  meum  fecit  patrem, 

who  in  a  soliloquy,  w.385f f.,  sums  up  all  the  past 
action, — his  commission  to  Pistoclerus,  the  eflforts 
of  Chrysalus  in  his  behalf,  and  the  final  success 
in  obtaining  the  money. 

Lydus,  as  he  had  threatened  in  v.383  .  .  . 
et  seni  faciam  palam,  now  appears  bringing 
Philoxenus,  Pistoclerus'  father,  to  the  Bacchides' 
house  to  reveal  to  him  his  son's  folly.    Mnesilo- 


22         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

chus  overhearing  their  conversation  believes  his 
friend  false,  vv.477ff.  In  the  soliloquy  which 
follows,  vv.5ooff.,  he  laments  the  supposed  in- 
fidelity of  his  friend,  vows  vengeance  upon 
Bacchis,  and  determines  to  hand  over  all  the 
money  to  his  father. 

V.516    Decretumst  remunerare  iam  omne  aurum 
patri. 

The  opening  lines  of  Act  III  6  bring  Mnesilo- 
chus  announcing  the  accomplishment  of  his 
threat,  thereby  rendering  the  first  trick  futile, 

v.530    Reddidi  patri  omne  aurum.     ...     of. 
V.516. 

Meeting  his  friend  Pistoclerus,  he  berates  him 
for  his  broken  faith  in  his  commission  to  find 
Bacchis.  But  the  misunderstanding  is  cleared  up 
by  Pistoclerus'  revelation  that  there  are  two 
sisters  named  Bacchis, 

V.568     .  .  .,  Duas  ergo  hie  intus  eccas  Bacchides. 

With  Act  IV  I,  the  appearance  of  the  para- 
site of  the  soldier  interested  in  Bacchis,  cf. 
vv.45f.,  announcing  the  imminent  arrival  of  his 
master, 

v.603     Sufflatus  ille  hue  ueniet 

renders  the  need  of  money  again  a  serious  prob- 
lem, 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      23 

vv.6o6f.     In  eum  nunc  haec  reuenit  res  locum, 
ut  quid  consili 
Dem  meo  sodali  super  arnica  nesciam: 
V.609     Neque    nummus    ullust    qui    reddatur 
militi, 

especially  as  the  money  which  might  have  been 
used  has  been  handed  over  to  the  rightful  owner, 

V.608    Qui  iratus  renumerauit  omne  aurum  patri. 

While  debating  what  to  do  Pistoclerus  meets 
Mnesilochus  coming  out  of  Bacchis'  house,  la- 
menting his  bad  luck,  especially  in  so  quickly  ren- 
dering up  the  much-needed  money.  His  misery 
is  increased  by  the  news  of  the  anticipated  ar- 
rival of  the  soldier  to  get  his  due, 

V.631     Militis    parasitus    modo    uenerat    aurum 
petere  hinc : 

But  there  is  hope  for  help  again  from  the  crafty 
slave, 

V.639     . .  .  Tuam  copiam  eccam  Chrysalum  uideo, 

who,  rejoicing  in  the  successful  outcome  of  his 
lie, 

vv.64iff.     Nam  duplex  hodie  f acinus  feci,  du- 
plicibus  spoliis  sum  adfectus. 
Erum  maiorem  meum  ut  ego  hodie 
lusi  lepide,  ut  ludificatust. 

Callidum  senem  callidis  dolis 
Compuli   et  perpuli,  mi   omnia  ut 
crederet, 


24  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

finds  out  upon  meeting  his  young  master, 
vv.67off.,  that  all  his  labour  has  been  in  vain  and 
that  he  must  again  get  money  from  the  old  man, 

vv.69if.     .  .   .  Nunc  hoc  tibi  curandumst,  Chry- 
sale, 
1  .  .  .  Vt  ad  senem  etiam  alteram  facias 

uiam. 
694       Vt  senem  hodie  doctum  docte   fallas 
aurumque  auferas. 

Thereupon  Chrysalus  plans  a  second  trick.  In  a 
letter  written  by  Mnesilochus  at  Chrysalus'  dicta- 
tion, vv.734ff.,  the  slave  issues  a  warning  to  the 
old  man  to  beware  of  him.  Armed  with  this  he 
starts  at  once  upon  the  second  trick, 

V.769     .   .   .  ei  tabellas  dem  in  manum. 

For  his  purpose  he  desires  that  the  old  man  shall 
be  angry,  and  the  old  man  is  justifiably  angry 
because  he  has  been  deceived  by  Chrysalus, 
vv.775flf.  Nicobulus  sarcastically  asks  Chry- 
salus how  soon  he  expects  him  to  start  on  his 
journey  to  Ephesus  to  claim  the  money  deposited 
there,  v.776  cf.  vv.3o6f.,  and  receives  the  letter 
of  warning  from  the  slave. 

In  spite  of  Nicobulus'  assurance  that  "fore- 
warned is  forearmed",  Chrysalus  is  confident  of 
getting  the  money, 

vv.8o5f.     Et  te  dixisti  id  aurum  ablaturum  tamen 
Per  sycophantiam  ? 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      25 

V.824       Numquam  au feres  hinc  aurum.     Ch. 
Atqui  iam  dabis. 

And  he  leads  the  old  man  to  spy  upon  his  son 
banqueting  with  the  meretrkes,  vv.83iff. 

While  they  are  thus  engaged,  chance  helps 
Chrysalus  by  the  arrival  of  the  soldier,  whose  re- 
mark, 

vv.842f.     Meamne    hie    Mnesilochus,    Nicobuli 
filius 
Per  uim  ut  retineat  mulierem?  .   .   . 

Chrysalus  seizes  upon  to  pretend  that  the  miles 
is  Bacchis'  husband, 

V.851.     Vir  hie  est  illius  mulieris  quacum  accu- 
bat. 

As  Nicobulus  thereupon  fears  that  his  son  may 
be  involved  in  a  lawsuit  for  interfering  with  an- 
other man's  wife,  he  agrees  to  Chrysalus'  sug- 
gestion to  buy  off  the  soldier, 

vv.86if.      .  .  .  quin  tu  me  exsolui  iubes? 
Ni.     Exsoluite  istum, 

and  the  second  trick  succeeds. 

Exultant  over  his  success,  Chrysalus  decides  to 
start  upon  a  third  trial  to  get  more  money,  which 
is  really  a  second  application  of  the  second  trick, 
since  Nicobulus  is  acting  under  the  misapprehen- 
sion caused  by  that.     The  trick  is  carried  out 


26  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

again  through  a  letter,  vv.997ff.,  purporting  to  be 
from  the  young  man,  Mnesilochus,  to  his  father, 
asking  for  money, 

vv.io25f.     Nunc  si  me  fas  est  obsecrare  abs  te, 
pater. 
Da  mihi  ducentos  nummos  Philippos, 
te  obsecro, 

which  is  to  be  used  presumably  to  settle  the 
claims  of  the  soldier's  wife,  v.  1009.  Nicobulus, 
believing  that  the  girl  is  the  soldier's  wife  and 
desiring  to  help  his  son  get  rid  of  her,  is  per- 
suaded and  gives  Chrysalus  the  money,  v,io62, 
and  the  trick  succeeds. 

Philoxenus'  monologue,  vv.io76flF.,^  serves  as 
an  introduction  to  the  banqueting  scene  where- 
in the  old  men,  determined  to  rescue  their  sons 
from  the  enticements  of  the  meretrices,  them- 
selves fall  a  prey  to  them.  They  are  finally 
aware  that  they  have  been  cheated,  vv.1125, 
1 184,  1206,  though  they  are  somewhat  reconciled 
by  the  offer  of  the  return  of  half  of  the  money, 

vv.iiSsa  f.     Quid  tandem,  si  dimidium  auri 
Redditur ? 


A.     General  Situation 

The  foregoing  analysis  of  the  Bacchides  has 
shown  a  youth  in  love  and  needing  assistance  to 

6  F.  Leo:  Der  Monolog,  op.  c4t.  p.4r9. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      27 

secure  the  object  of  his  love.  The  same  general 
situation  appears  in  no  less  than  eleven  other 
plays : — 

Asinaria  vv.52f.     Equidem  scio  iam  filius  quod 
amet  meus 
Istanc  meretricem  e  proxumo 
Philaenium 
vv.57f.     De.     Tune    es    adiutor    nunc 
amanti  filio? 
Li.     Sum  uero,  et  alter  noster 
est  Leonida. 

Miles  vv.99f.     Erat  erus  Athenis  mihi  adu- 
lescens  optumus 
Is  amabat  meretricem 
and  the  need  of  the  adulescens  for  assistance  is 
implied  in  the  efforts  put  forth  by  the  seruos 
which  he  narrates  in  the  prologue,  vv.iiiff. 

Pseudolus  vv.35    Tuam  amicam  uideo,  Calidore. 
41     Phoenicium   Calidoro   amatori 

suo 
78     Nilne  adiuvare  me  audes  ?  .  .  . 
i04f.  Spero  alicunde  hodie  me  bona 
opera  .... 
Tibi  inuenturum  esse  auxilium 
argentarium. 

Persav.i     Qui  amans  egens  ingressus  est  prin- 
ceps  in  Amoris  uias 
vv.SifF.     Omnem  rem  inueni,  ut  sua  sibi  pe- 
cunia 


28  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Hodie    illam    faciat    leno    libertatem 

suam. 
Sed    eccum    parasitum    quoius    mihi 

auxiliost  opus. 

The  Persa  differs  from  the  other  plays  in  that 
its  characters  are  from  a  different  rank  in  society, 
i.  e.  slaves  who  enter  upon  their  intrigues  dur- 
ing the  absence  of  their  master.^ 

Epidicus.  In  this  play  the  transactions  involv- 
ing the  meretrix  are  completed  before  the  play 
begins, 

vv.47f.     Ipse     mandauit     mihi     ab     lenone     ut 
fidicina 
Quam  amabat  emeretur  sibi:  id  ei  im- 
petratum  reddidi, 

but  the  youth  Stratippocles  has  transferred  his 
affections  to  another  object, 

vv.43ff.     Quia  forma  lepida  et  liberali  captiuam 
adulescentulam 

De  praeda  mercatust 

.    .   .  animi  causa 


1  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  Amphitruo,  though  In  It 
the  presence  of  gods  engaging  In  the  intrigues  of  mortals 
makes  It  unique.  But  in  the  Persa  the  slave  and  in  the 
Amphitruo  the  god  play  the  usual  role  of  the  adulescens 
in  love. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      29 

a  captive  in  war,  and  is  needing  help  a  second 
time  to  extricate  himself  from  the  financial  dif- 
ficulties attendant  upon  the  purchase, 

Curculio.  In  this  play  and  in  the  Poenulus 
the  girls  have  not  yet  entered  the  profession  of 
meretrices, 

vv.46f .     Earn  uolt  meretricem  facere :  ea  me  de- 
perit : 
Ego  autem  cum  ilia  facere  nolo  mutuom. 

vv.67ff.  Nunc  hinc  parasitum  in  Cariam  misi 
meum 

Petitum  argentum  a  meo  sodali  mu- 
tuom: 

Quod  si  non  affert,  quo  me  uortam 
nescio. 

Mercator  vv.33off.  The  plans  of  the  old  man 
against  his  son  indicate  clearly  that  the  youth 
needs  help  to  retain  the  girl,  and  the  senex  needs 
help  to  secure  her. 

w.7of..    Quia   patrem   prius    se   conuenire   non 
uolt  neque  conspicari, 
Quam  id  argentum  quod  debetur  pro  ilia 
dinumerauerit. 

Poenulus   vv.96ff.     Earum    hie    adulescens    al- 
teram efflictim  perit 
Suam     sibi     cognatam     in- 


30         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

prudens,  neque  scit  quae 

siet, 
Neque  earn  umquam  tetigit : 

ita  cum  leno  macerat : 
w.i63ff.     .  .  .  Vin  tu  illam  hodie  sine 

dispendio 
Tuo  tuam  libertam  facere? 
Ag.     Cupio,  Milphio. 
Mi.    Ego  faciam  ut  facias. 

Rudens.  The  Rudens  has  in  general  the  same 
situation  as  the  Bacchides,  etc.  Although  Plesidip- 
pus  does  not  need  money  or  trickery,  he  is  in 
danger  of  losing  the  girl, 

vv.42ff.     Adulescens  quidam  ciuis  huius  Atticus 
Earn  uidit  ire  e  ludo  fidicinio  domum. 
Amare  occepit:  ad  lenonem  deuenit. 
Minis  triginta  sibi  puellam  destinat 
Datque  arrabonem  et  iure  iurando  alli- 

gat. 
Is  leno,  ut  se  aequomst,  flocci  non  fecit 

fidem 
Neque  quod  iratus  adulescenti  dixerat. 
63flF.     Conscendit  nauem,  auehit  meretriculas. 
Adulescenti  alii  narrant  ut  res  gesta 

sit: 
Lenonem  abisse.  .  .  . 

Mostellaria.  In  the  Mostellaria  the  only  re- 
semblance is  that  a  similar  situation  has  been 
solved  before  the  play  opens,  cf.  Epidicus. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      31 

vv.537if.     Danista  adest,  qui  dedit  .... 

Qui  amicast  empta  quoque 

Manufesta  res  est,  nisi  quid  occurro 

prius, 
Ne  hoc  senex  resciscat. 

The  home-coming  of  the  father  brings  on  the 
compHcations ;  but  the  object  of  the  trickery  is 
not  to  secure  the  girl,  as  she  has  already  been 
purchased  and  manumitted. 

Casina  and  Amphitruo.  In  both  these  plays 
we  find  the  same  general  situation, — a  lover  need- 
ing to  employ  trickery  to  secure  the  object  of  his 
love.  In  the  Casina  the  rivalry  between  a  father 
and  son  for  Casina's  affections,  cf.  Mercator, 

vv.48f earn  puellam  hie  senex 

Amat  eflflictim  et  item  contra  filius 

necessitates  the  counter-plots  of  each  against  the 
other,  V.50,  which  are  the  basis  of  the  action. 
Inasmuch  as  Casina  is  already  a  member  of  their 
household,  vv.4off .,  a  foundling  brought  up  in  the 
family,  her  position  is  different  from  that  of  the 
girls  concerned  in  the  other  plays.  Hence  also 
the  question  of  money  does  not  enter  into  the  de- 
ception. But  the  whole  action  centers  in  the  ef- 
forts of  the  two  rivals  to  outwit  each  other. 

In  the  Amphitruo,  as  has  already  been  stated, 
the  characters  are  on  a  different  level  from  those 
in  the  other  plays,  but  the  object  of  the  divine 
lover  is  the  same.     And  the  personation  resorted 


32  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

to  by   Jupiter,   vv.115,    121,   is   the   method  by 
which  he  secures  the  object  of  his  desire.^ 

Twelve  of  the  twenty-one  plays,  therefore, 
have  the  same  general  situation,  and  in  a 
thirteenth,  the  Mostellaria,  the  same  problem  has 
already  been  solved  before  the  play  opens.  In 
the  Captivi  and  the  Truculentus,  deception  is  also 
important,  though  not  for  the  same  purpose.  This 
investigation  deals  primarily  with  seventeen 
plays,  excluding  the  Aulularia,  Cistellaria,  Ru- 
dens,  and  Vidularia. 

B. — Characters 

The  general  situation  of  the  Bacchides  showed 
that  the  trickery  in  the  play  is  undertaken  in  the 
interests  of  an  adulescens  and  a  meretrix,  who 
are  accordingly  the  central  figures.  Such  is  the 
case  in  nine  of  the  other  plays : — Asinaria,  Cur- 
culio,  Epidicus,  Mercator,  Miles,  Persa,  Poenu- 
lus,  Pseudolus,  Mostellaria.^ 

In  the  other  plays  included  in  Class  i  dif- 
ferent characters  hold  the  center  of  attention : — 


2  In  Terence's  Phormio,  Adelphoe,  Andria  and  Eunu- 
chus,  youths  are  in  a  similar  situation;  in  the  first  two, 
the  plots  are  made  more  complex  by  the  presence  of  two 
pairs  of  lovers. 

1  In  the  Mostellaria  it  should  be  noted  again  that  the 
comt)lications  which  give  rise  to  the  need  of  deception  are 
the  result  of  Phllolaches'  relations  with  the  meretrix  and 
precede  the  action  of  the  play.  In,  the  Persa,  as  already 
noted,  the  adulescens  is  a  servus,  playing  the  role  of 
lover,  cf.  Terence's  Adelphoe,  Heauton  Timorumenos, 
and  Phormio. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      33 

in  the  Menaechmi,  the  twin  brothers  and  the 
meretrix  Erotium;  in  the  Casina  and  the  Mer- 
cator,  rival  adulescentes  and  senes,  the  girl 
Casina  and  the  meretrix  Pasicompsa;  in  the 
Trinummus,  a  family-plot,  the  senes  working  in 
the  interests  of  the  girl  in  their  care ;  in  the  Cap- 
tivi,  the  adulescentes  and  the  senex  Hegio;  in 
the  Amphitruo,  Jupiter  and  Alcumena. 

But  for  the  purposes  of  this  study,  and  in  fact 
in  the  development  of  the  plays  themselves,  much 
more  important  characters  are  the  trickster  and 
the  person  tricked.  In  nine  of  the  plays  a  slave 
is  the  agent  of  the  deception^ : 

(i)  Servus  vs.  senex: 

Bacchides  v.239     Extexam  ego  ilium  pulcre  iam, 
si  di  uolunt 

where  Chrysalus,  the  slave,  having  taken  upon 
himself  his  master's  business  and  meeting  the 
young  man's  father,  Nicobulus,  decides  to  cheat 
him  of  the  needed  money. 

Captivi  vv.35f.     Hisce    autem    inter    sese    hunc 
confinxerunt  dolum, 
Quo  pacto  hie  seruos  suom  erum 
hinc  amittat  domum: 


2  cf.  also  the  Amphitruo  and  Mercator  where  the  servus 
has  a  large  part  in  the  deception,  cf.  G.  Boissler:  Quo- 
modo  Graecos  poetas  Plautus  transtulerit.  Parts,  1857, 
pp.24ff.  • 


34  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Here  the  trick  is  played  by  Tyndarus  upon  the 
slave-owner,  Hegio,  the  senex.  (The  general 
situation  is,  of  course,  not  the  same.) 

Epidicus  vv.87f Ego  miser  perpuli 

Meis  dolis  senem 

are  the  words  of  the  slave  Epidicus  who,  having 
finished  one  trick  and  found  his  efforts  wasted, 
declares  his  determination  to  attack  his  master  a 
second  time,  v.  163. 

Mostellaria  v.387  The  slave  Tranio  promises 
to  keep  his  young  master  out  of  his  father's 
clutches. 

(2)  Servus  vs.  leno : 

Pseudolus.  In  reply  to  his  arnica's  letter  stat- 
ing her  precarious  situation,  vv-Siif.,  Calidorus 
appeals  to  his  slave  Pseudolus  to  help  him  find 
the  needed  money,  v.8o,  and  the  slave  agrees  to 
do  so,  vv.i04f.,  directing  his  efforts  against  the 
leno,  though  incidentally  the  father  of  Calidorus 
may  be  involved,  v.  120.  As  the  plot  develops, 
Pseudolus  proves  able  to  cope  with  two  enemies.* 
It  should  be  noted  here  that  this  apparent  doub- 
ling of  plot,  with  the  resultant  complications  and 
inconsistencies,  has  been  used  to  prove  contamin- 
atio  in  this  play.*     In    this    respect    of    double 

3  Lorenz:   Pseudolus,  ed.  Introd.  pp.l9ff. 

4  Lorenz:  op.  cit.;  Legrand:  Daos,  p.  384,  note  2;  (A. 
Schmitt:  De  Pseudoll  Plautlnae  exemplo  Attico,  diss. 
1909,  p.3ff.,  against  contominatio). 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      35 

deuteragonist,  if  we  may  so  call  it,  this  play  re- 
sembles the  Miles  (cf.  below) 

Persav.52    Vsque    ero    domi,    dum    excoxero 
lenoni  malam. 

In  connection  with  this  play  it  should  be  noted 
that  the  plot  is  simplified  by  the  fact  that  the 
servus  is  working  in  his  own  interests, — i.  e.,  he 
is  both  trickster  and  the  person  in  whose  interests 
the  deception  is  practised.  (Such  is  practically 
also  the  case  in  the  Amphitruo  where  Jupiter 
plays  the  trickster  in  his  own  interests.) 

Poenulus  vv.i68f.  show  that  the  slave  Milphio 
is  the  inventor  of  the  plan  of  deception  against 
the  leno.  (The  Poenulus  is  also  considered  a 
"contaminated"  play.) 

(3)  Servus  vs.  other  characters: 

vs.  mercator  in  the  Asinaria,  w.94f.,  though 
the  person  who  suffers  the  loss  is  the  matrona. 


vs.  servus    and    his    master    in    the    Miles, 
vv.i45ff. 

Here  Palaestrio  plans  the  confusion  to  which  he 
will  drive  his  fellow  slave  Sceledrus,  and  in  the 
second  part  of  the  play  the  miles  himself,  vv.767f. 
This  play,  because  of  its  double  plot,  is  suspected, 
like  the  Pseudolus,  of  being  contaminated.' 

5  Liorenz:  Miles  Gloriosus,  ed.  Introd.  p.31f.;  Leo:  Plaut. 
Forsch,  pp.l78f. 


36  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Two  of  the  plays,  the  Curculio  and  Trinum- 
mus,  depart  from  this  norm  of  the  slave  as  the 
trickster^ : 

Parasitus  vs.  leno'^ 

Curculio  vv.65ff .,  where  the  lover,  Phaedro- 
mus,  asserts  his  need  and  the  means  which  he  has 
taken  to  meet  that  need.  He  finds  that  his  as- 
surance is  not  ill  founded,  when  Curculio  des- 
cribes his  efforts  in  his  behalf,  vv.329ff.,  and  out- 
Unes  his  further  plans,  v.370. 

Senex  vs.  adulescens: 

Trinummus  vv.763ff .,  where  the  two  old  men 
conspire  to  provide  the  ward  of  one  of  them  with 
a  dowry.  But  Megaronides  employs  an  agent  to 
carry  out  his  plan,  v.765. 

It  is  evident  from  the  comparison  of  the  de- 
tails just  given  that  the  favourite  agent  of  the 
deception  in  the  comedies  is  a  slave.  Although 
the  deception  is  carried  out  primarily  by  this 
one  chief  agent,  yet  in  nearly  every  case  the  as- 
sistance of  some  other  person,  or  persons,  is  en- 
listed, even  though  that  help  is  not  always  used 
after  it  has  been  gained. 

The  mention  of  these  assistants  may  serve  to 
introduce  that  class  which  we  call 

(i)  Friends  of  the  interested  persons: 

6  So  too  does  the  Truculentus. 

7  cf.  Terence:  Phormio,  in  which  the  leading  trickster  is 
a  parasite. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      37 

Asinaria  vv.57f .  Demaenetus,  the  father  in 
the  Asinaria,  starts  the  slave  on  his  course  of  de- 
ception, vv,57f.,  but  in  spite  of  his  desire  to  help 
even  to  the  point  of  willingness  to  be  himself 
cheated  by  his  slave,  v.91,  he  realizes  that  he  can 
be  of  little  assistance  since  his  wife  controls 
the  purse-strings.  It  turns  out,  however,  that  he 
is  of  decided  assistance,  cf.  below. 

Epidicus  V.291     Quern  hominem  inueniemus  ad 
earn    rem    utilem?     Ep.     Hie 
erit 
Optumus : 

the  slave  accepts  the  old  man  Apoecides  as  a  suit- 
able coadjutor,  but  intends  to  deceive  him;  so 
Apoecides  is  not  a  real  assistant,  as  is  evident 
from  his  narrative  of  the  course  of  events, 
vv.4iiff.  He  is  a  mere  passive  witness  and  is 
himself  deceived,  and  with  the  words, 

V.422     Ei  uolo  ire  aduocatus 

and  his  departure  to  the  forum  he  disappears 
from  the  play. 

Pseudolus  vv.547f .  In  similar  fashion  the  help 
of  Callipho  is  engaged,  in  the  Pseudolus,  in  case 
it  should  be  needed.  But  he  disappears  from 
the  play  at  the  end  of  this  act  and  has  no  share 
in  the  plot  of  deception. 

Bacchides.    Pistoclerus,  in  the  Bacchides,  is  in 


38  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

fact  more  active  than  the  usual  friend,  since  in 
person  he  carries  out  his  friend's  commission  of 
finding  his  arnica,  vv.389ff.  Most  of  his  efforts, 
however,  have  been  exerted  before  the  action  of 
the  play  begins,  though  even  within  the  play  he  is 
still  busy  in  his  friend's  behalf,  vv.S26ff, 

Miles.  Periplecomenus,  in  the  Miles,  the  old 
friend  of  Pleusicles,  receives  the  young  man  into 
his  house,  which  has  the  advantage  of  adjoining 
that  of  the  miles,  and  thus  affords  him  an  op- 
portunity of  meeting  his  arnica  who  is  detained 
there,  vv.i34ff.  Later  he  also  connives  at  a 
second  means  of  deceiving  the  miles  through  a 
trick  which  requires  his  more  immediate  partici- 
pation, vv.766ff. 

Pal.     Nunc    hoc    animum    aduortite    ambo. 

mihi  opus  est  opera  tua 
Periplecomene :  nam  ego  inueni  lepi- 

dam  sycophantiam, 
Qui  admutiletur  miles  .... 

V.782       Ecquam  tu  potis  reperire  forma  lepida 
mulierem, 

vv.792f adsimuletque  se 

Tuam  esse  uxorem: 

Mercator.  Lysimachus,  vv.499ff.,  shows  him- 
self a  friend  in  need  by  assisting  his  friend 
Demipho  to  gain  possession  of  Pasicompsa,  even 
to  the  extent  of  harbouring  her  in  his  own  house, 
vv.563ff.  And  the  son  Charinus  is  aided  and 
abetted  by  his  friend  Eutychus,  vv.485ff. ; 
vv.sSSflf. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      39 

Trinummus.  Megaronides  assists  his  old 
friend  Callicles  in  planning  his  simple  device, 
Act  III  3,  and  also  hires  the  nugator  for  him.      ] 

(2)  Slaves  as  assistants  are  found  in  the  Am- 
phitruo,  Asinaria,  Casina,  Mercator,  Persa,  and 
Poenulus. 

Amphitruo.  Mercury  as  a  pseudo-servus  im- 
personating Sosia,  VV.115,  124,  puts  the  real  Sosia 
to  rout,  Act  I  I,  vv.295,455,  and  throughout 
the  play  assists  Jupiter  in  carrying  out  his  de- 
ception. 

Asinaria.  At  his  master's  suggestion,  Libanus 
associates  his  fellow  slave  with  himself  in  the 
trickery  which  he  is  to  carry  out  in  his  young 
master's  interests,  vv.ioif.,  and  Leonida  takes  a 
very  active  part  as  the  pseudo-Saurea, 

vv.368f .    Te  ex  Leonida  futurum  esse  atriensem 
Sauream, 
Dum  argentum  afferat  mercator  pro 
asinis. 

Mercator.  In  the  Mercator  the  young  man's 
interests  are  furthered  by  his  slave. 

Casina.  In  the  Casina  the  father  enlists  the 
assistance  of  his  vilicus,  v,52,  the  son  that  of  his 
armigerus,  v.55,  each  to  pretend  that  he  himself 
wishes  to  marry  the  girl  Casina. 


40  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Persa.  A  fellow  slave  Sagaristio  by  appro- 
priating his  master's  money,  helps  Toxilus  first 
to  find  the  money  which  he  needs,  vv.262f.,  and 
later  takes  part  in  the  actual  confounding  of  the 
leno,  in  the  impersonation,  vv.459ff. 

Poenulus.  Milphio's  plans,  in  the  Poenulus, 
include  the  assistance  of  the  vilicus  Collabiscus, 
vv.i94f.,  but  his  instructions  are  evidently  given 
oflf  the  stage,  as  he  appears  in  Act  III  2  primed 
for  his  part,  cf .  V.S78 

lam  tenes  praecepta  in  corde?     Co.     Pulcre. 

(3)  Hired  assistants 

A  still  larger  place  is  filled  by  those  who  are 
hired  to  carry  out  some  part  of  the  deception. 
Various  characters  perform  this  function. 

Fidicina  in  the  Epidicus,  vv.3i4ff. ;  a  meretrix 
in  the  Miles,  vv.S/off. ;  advocati  or  testes  in  the 
Poenulus,  vv.424,  506;  a  syphocanta  in  the 
Pseudolus,  Act  IV  i,  and  in  the  Trinummus, 
V.815.  In  the  Persa  the  parasite  is  persuaded  for 
a  consideration  to  lend  his  services  and  those  of 
his  daughter,  vv.83,  I27f.,  in  carrying  out  the 
trick  against  the  leno;  but  they  can  hardly  be 
called  hired  assistants. 

(4)  Assistants  sent  by  chance  (Tdyri). 

In  a  consideration  of  this  agency  it  is  neces- 
sary to  distinguish  between  such  appearances  in 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      41 

the  plays  as  that  of  the  miles  in  the  Bacchides, 
too  fortuitous*  and  yet  constantly  anticipated 
throughout  the  first  part  of  the  play,  of. 

V.58     ....  miles  quom  ueniat,  uolo : 

V.76     ....  miles  quom  hue  adueniat,  te  uolo 
Me  amplexari. 

vv.sSgff.     .  .  Me  misit  miles  ad  eam  Qeomachus, 
Vel    ut    ducentos    Philippos    reddat 

aureos 
Vel    ut   hinc   in    Elatiam   hodie    eat 

secum  semul 

where  the  appearance  of  the  miles'  parasite,  his 
demand  for  the  money  due  his  master,  the  refusal 
of  it  by  Pistoclerus,  or  rather  the  confident  denial 
on  the  part  of  Pistoclerus  that  Bacchis  will  con- 
sent to  go  with  the  miles,  prepare  the  way  for  the 
miles'  appearance  in  person  to  enforce  his  de- 
mands, and  the  entirely  unforeseen  intervention 
of  Harpax  in  the  Pseudolus  or  of  Hanno  in  the 
Poenulus. 

This  latter  sort  of  chance  is  the  substitution  in 
comedy  for  the  deus  ex  machina  of  tragedy  f  for 
as  Lorenz  also  points  out,^°  this  chance,  i.  e.  turn 
of  fortune,  goes  back  to  the  conception  of  Euri- 
pides: into  the  place  of  the  Moirai  steps  Tuxt)." 

8  Legrand:  Daos,  p.396. 
9L,egran,d:  Daos,  p.395. 

10  Lorenz:  Pseudolus,  ed.  Introd.  pp.20f. 

11  Callldamates  in  the  Mostellarla  Is  a  sort  of  homo  ex 
machina  in  the  way  in  which  he  settles  the  difficulties  by 
mollifying  the  senex. 


42  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Moreover,  this  conception  is  far  more  compre- 
hensible, because  so  Hke  everyday  practical  ex- 
perience, and  hence  very  suitable  to  comedy.  It 
is  a  personal  rather  than  a  divine  conception  of 
Tuyyi  and  it  fits  into  comedy,  especially  into  come- 
dies like  the  Pseudolus  v^hich  are  so  largely  a 
portrayal  of  the  character  of  the  clever  trickster ; 
for  in  seizing  the  chance-offered  solution  of  the 
difficulties  and  using  it  to  his  own  ends  the  trick- 
ster displays  to  great  advantage  his  own  extra- 
ordinary cleverness. 

As  has  been  mentioned,  such  chance-sent  as- 
sistants are  found  in  the  Poenulus  and  Pseudolus. 

Poenulus.  In  the  Poenulus  the  chance  arrival 
of  Hanno  acts  as  an  incentive  to  Milphio  for  a 
new  trick, 


V.1086    Festiuom  f acinus  uenit  mihi  in  mentem 

modo 
that  Hanno  should  assume  the  role  of  father  of 
the  girls,  vv.i099ff.,  which  results  in  the  final 
anagnorisis. 

Pseudolus.  Pseudolus  asserts  confidently  that 
he  has  ready  duplicis  triplicis  dolos  perfidias  for 
the  confounding  of  the  enemy,  but  the  chance 
arrival  of  Harpax,  Act  II  2,  causes  him  to  set 
them  all  aside, 

V.601     Nouo  consilio  nunc  mihi  opus  est :  noua 
res  haec  subito  mi  objectast 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      43 

and  he  makes  the  personation  of  Harpax  by 
Simia  solve  the  difficulties  in  the  plot. 

Chance  may  perhaps  be  said  to  have  brought 
about  the  meeting  of  Curculio  with  his  master's 
rival,  the  miles  in  Caria, 

V.337 forte  aspicio  militem 

thus  giving  him  the  opportunity  of  obtaining  in- 
formation whereby  to  serve  his  master's  interests. 
But  in  this  case  the  coincidence  seems  natural 
and  not  brought  about  by  the  interposition  of 
chance,  under  desperate  circumstances,"  after  all 
other  resources  have  failed. 

In  a  way,  chance  may  be  said  to  control  the 
action  in  the  Mostellaria ;  for  all  the  deception 
is  improvised  to  meet  the  need  of  the  moment.^^ 
Tranio,  to  be  sure,  like  Tyndarus  in  the  Captivi, 
employs  no  definite  assistant.  But  he  seizes  upon 
any  help  presented,  as  that  afforded  by  the 
chance  arrival  of  the  danista,  Act  III  i,  to 
make  up  a  lie  to  serve  his  ends. 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  trickster  in 
nearly  every  play  marshals  forces  to  assist  him 
in  his  attack  and  does  not  depend  entirely  upon 
his  own  resources.  His  cleverness  is  revealed 
and  the  complexity  of  the  web  of  deception  in- 

12  Legrand;  Daos,  p.393f. 
isRitschl:  Opuscula  n  p. 740. 


44  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

creased  by  the  resultant  involved  interworking 
of  plan  and  action  on  the  part  of  the  trickster 
himself  and  his  assistants,  on  the  one  hand,  and 
his  opponents,  on  the  other. 

The  fact  that  Tyndarus  depends  upon  his  own 
efforts  to  carry  out  the  plan  of  the  Captivi  and 
employs  no  assistants,  shows  again  that  that  play 
is  unique,  though  chance  plays  a  large  part  of  the 
comedy,  according  to  Brix  the  chief  role.^* 

It  should  be  added  that  the  intervention  of 
chance  differs  also  from  the  divine  aid  afforded 
by  various  agents  in  several  of  the  plays,  cf.  the 
Lar  f amiliaris,  in  the  Aulularia ;  Auxilium  in  the 
Cistellaria;  Arcturus  in  the  Rudens.  The  gods 
in  these  plays  have  no  active  part  in  the  develop- 
ment of  the  plot  within  the  play,^^  as  chance  has 
in  the  others,  but  the  expository  prologue  is 
spoken  by  them,  since  no  character  of  the  plays 
knows  all  the  facts  of  which  the  audience  must 
be  informed. 

C.     Object  and  Nature  of  Deception 

In  section  II  A  it  has  been  shown  that  the  situ- 
ation of  a  lover  needing  assistance  is  the  most 
common  one  in  the  plays  and  that  in  eight  cases, 
the  Asinaria,  Bacchides,  Curculio,  Epidicus, 
Miles,  Persa,  Poenulus,  and  Pseudolus,  that  as- 
sistance is  used  for  the  securing  of  a  meretrix. 
This  is  the  ultimate  object.     But  as  a  means 

14  Brix:   Captlvl,  ed.  Introd.  p.3  (1910). 

15  Arctunia,  for  example,  causes  the  storm  which  pre- 
vents the  leno  from  deceiving  Plesidlppus. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      45 

to  the  attainment  of  that  ultimate  end  in  no  less 
than  six  plays  an  immediate  object  exists, — 
money,  upon  which  the  trickery  and  therefore  a 
large  part  of  the  comic  interest  is  concentrated.^ 

Bacchides.  The  immediate  object  of  the 
Bacchides  has  been  noted,  i.  e.  to  get  money; 

V.46  Nam  si  haec  habeat  aurum  quod  illi 

renumeret,  faciat  lubens, 

vv.i03f.     Meus  ille  quidemst,  tibi  nunc  operam 
dabo  de  Mnesilocho,  soror. 
Vt   hie   accipias   potius   aurum   quam 
hinc  eas  cum  milite 

with  the  secondary  purpose  of  paying  off  the 
claims  of  the  soldier,  as  indicated  in  these  same 
citations. 

In  three  of  the  plays,  Curculio,  Epidicus, 
Pseudolus,  the  object  is  to  get  money  to  purchase 
the  meretrix  outright. 

Curculio.  The  meretrix  is  to  be  bought  in  or- 
der to  free  her  for  her  lover's  sake, 

vv.2o8f.     Ita  me  Venus  amet,  ut  ego  te  hoc  tri- 
duom  numquam  sinam 
In    domo    esse    istac,    quin    ego    te 
liberalem  liberem. 


1  cf.  Terence:  Phormlo  and  Heauton  Timorumenos. 


46  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Epidicus.  Twice  money  must  be  secured  for 
the  purchase  of  the  objects  of  Stratippocles' 
fancy,  since  that  fancy  is  transferred  from  one 
love  to  another, 

V.I 35     lUam  amabam  olim:  nunc  iam  alia  cura 
impendet  pectori. 

The  first  transaction  has,  however,  preceded  the 
action  of  the  play,  vv.47ff.  The  second  is  the 
immediate  object  of  the  deception  within  the 
play,  43f.,  ii4f. 

Pseudolus.     The  immediate  object  is  stated  in 

v.50     Quam  subito  argento  mi  usus  inuento  siet 

and  in  the  arnica's  letter  from  which  Calidorus 
learns  of  the  desperate  straits  in  which  she  is  and 
the  imminent  purchase  of  her  by  a  miles  unless 
he  can  come  to  the  rescue.^ 

Persa,  In  the  Persa  together  with  the  need  to 
get  money  to  free  his  arnica, 

vv.33f.     Haec    de    summa   hodiest,   mea   amica 
sitne  libera 
An  sempiternam  seruitutem  seruiat 

is  the  object  of  robbing  the  leno  of  the  money 
after  he  gets  it, 

2  Phaedrla's  plight  in  Terence's  Phornalo  l9  similar. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      47 

vv,325f.     Nam  iam  omneis  sycophantias  instruxi 
et  comparaui, 
Quo    pacto    ab    lenone    auferam    hoc 
argentum 

Asinaria.  The  money  in  this  play  is  to  be  used 
to  purchase  the  services  of  the  meretrix  for  one 
year, 

vv.i03f.     Perficito    argentum    hodie    ut    habeat 
filius, 
Amicae  quod  det. 

\v.22gi.       .  .  .  die,  quid  me  aequom  censes  pro 
ilia  tibi  dare 
Annum  hunc   ne   cum   quiquam   alio 
sit? 

To  free  a  meretrix  by  other  means  than  money 
is  the  object  of  the  Miles  and  the  Poenulus. 

Miles.  The  assertion  of  the  arnica  that  she 
desires  to  get  away  from  the  power  of  the  miles 

V.I 26.    Ait  sese  Athenas  fugere  cupere  ex  hac 
domu : 

starts  Palaestrio  upon  his  work  of  rescue. 

Poenulus.  For  the  purpose  of  outwitting  the 
leno  and  cheating  him  out  of  money  and  his 
property,  in  the  person  of  the  girl,  Agorastocles 
and  his  slave  Milphio  lay  their  plans  in  this  play, 


48  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

vv.i53flF,     Amo  immodeste 

At    ego    hanc    uicinam    dico    Adel- 

phasium  meam 
Lenonis  huius  meretricem  maiusculam. 

vv.i68f.      Totum  lenonem  tibi  cum  tota  familia 
Dabo  hodie  dono. 

Hence  the  plan  to  free  the  girl.  Agorastocles  has 
apparently  plenty  of  money  and  therefore  does 
not  need,  so  far  as  it  is  concerned,  to  cheat  the 
leno.  But  the  comic  effect  of  the  play  is  in- 
creased by  this  ruse,  hence  its  inclusion. 

In  the  other  plays  the  ultimate  and  the  im- 
mediate object  are  in  general  identical.  In  the 
Mostellaria,  however,  the  object  of  the  deception 
changes  as  the  action  proceeds.  In  fact  the 
trickery  has  no  substantial  object.  It  is  all 
directed  as  a  temporary  expedient  toward  tem- 
porary results.  The  need  for  money  exists  be- 
fore the  play  opens,  i.  e.  to  pay  off  the  loan  given 
by  the  danista, 

vv.626f.     Quod  illuc  argentumst?      Est  —  huic 
debet  Philolaches 
Paulum. 

But  this  need  is  only  coincident  with  the  primary 
necessity  which  is  the  motive  of  the  deception, 
i.  e.  preventing  the  old  man's  discovery  of  his 
son's  follies  during  his  own  absence  from  home 
by  keeping  him  out  of  his  own  house,  vv.389fF. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES     49 

Let  us  consider  briefly  the  object  of  the 
trickery  in  the  other  plays.  In  the  Amphitruo, 
the  immediate  and  ultimate  objects  are  identical, 
— the  securing  of  the  beloved  object,  transferred 
as  already  noted  in  section  II  A  to  a  different 
plane,  with  Alcumena  taking  the  place  of  the 
meretrix  of  the  other  plays,  unwittingly,  however, 
cf.  vv.ii5ff.,  121,  124,  464!^.  To  that  end  Jupi- 
ter becomes  an  intriguing  adulescens  and  Mer- 
cury a  servus. 

In  the  Casina  and  the  Mercator  the  ultimate  ob- 
ject is  similar.  Moreover  it  should  be  noted  that 
in  all  three  of  these  plays  the  deception  concerns 
that  ultimate  object,  with  the  result  of  a  more 
simple  and  more  direct  plot.  A  similar  purpose 
is  the  basis  of  the  action  of  the  Rudens,  which 
starts  with  the  shipwreck  of  the  leno,  while  on  his 
way  to  Sicily,  whither  he  is  taking  in  his 
charge  the  girl  beloved  by  Plesidippus, 
who  is  eager  to  rescue  her  from  the  other's 
power.  Arcturus  lends  the  most  effective  assist- 
ance. Deception  hardly  enters  into  the  solution 
of  the  plot,  which  is  facilitated  by  an  anagnorisis. 

There  remain  then  for  consideration  the  Cap- 
tivi,  Menaechmi,  Trinummus,  and  Truculentus. 
Since  the  deception  in  the  Menaechmi,  as  has 
been  pointed  out  above,  results  merely  from  the 
confusion  in  identity  of  the  twin  brothers,  that 
also  lacks  purpose  and  because  of  this  fact  need 
merely  be  mentioned  here. 

In  the  Captivi  the  purpose  of  the  exchange  of 
roles  between  master  and  slave  is  to  secure  the 
freedom  of  the  former,  vv.39ff. 


50         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

In  the  Trinummus,  as  has  already  been  stated, 
the  purpose  is  to  provide  the  young  ward  with  a 
dowry. 

In  the  Truculentus,  the  meretrix  Phronesium, 
vv.iSff.,  practises  her  deception,  in  fooUng 
Diniarchus,  to  enrich  herself  at  the  expense  of 
the  miles.     The  latter  is  also  deceived  by  her. 

Summing  up  then,  we  find  that  the  chief  ob- 
ject of  the  trickery,  and  the  ultimate  one,  is  the 
securing  of  I'objet  aime,  usually  a  meretrix,  oc- 
curring in  thirteen  of  the  plays, — Asinaria, 
Bacchides,  Miles,  Mostellaria,  Pseudolus,  Persa, 
Amphitruo,  Epidicus,  Curculio,  Poenulus,  Casina, 
Mercator,  Rudens.  The  immediate  object  of  the 
deception  is  in  six  cases  money, — Asinaria, 
Bacchides,  Curculio,  Epidicus,  Pseudolus,  Persa ; 
while  in  the  Miles  and  the  Poenulus  other  means 
than  money  are  used  for  the  freeing  of  the  m^ere- 
trix,  as  also  in  in  Casina,  Mercator,  and  Rudens. 
In  the  other  plays  the  interests  involved  in  the 
stratagems  of  the  trickster  vary. 

From  all  three  points  of  view  from  which  we 
have  thus  far  considered  the  comedies  of  Plau- 
tus,  the  similarity  of  plot  is  apparent.  The  gen- 
eral situation  is  the  same  in  at  least  ten^  of  the 
plays,  cf.  II  A,  youths  needing  assistance  in  af- 
faires de  coeur.  Moreover,  if  the  category  of 
lovers  is  extended  to  include  senes  as  well  as 
adulescentes,  deus  as  well  as  homo,  three  more 
plays  may  be  added  to  that  list,  Amphitruo, 
Casina,  Mercator.     The  same  character,  a  slave, 

3  Not  counting  the  plays  which  are  without  Important 
trickery. 


ANALYSIS  OF  THE  BACCHIDES      51 

carries  out  the  deception  in  nearly  all  the  plays, 
though  the  character  against  whom  the  strata- 
gem is  directed  varies, — a  senex,  a  leno,  a  fellow- 
slave,  etc.  The  assistants  engaged  to  carry  out 
the  deception  also  vary,  as  does  the  extent  of  the 
help  which  is  contributed  by  them.  As  assist- 
ants slaves  are  the  favourites,  fellow-slaves  of  the 
doli  architectus.  The  influence  upon  the  course 
of  the  action  exerted  by  chance,  Tuxr),  should  also 
be  recalled. 

The  plays  accordingly  are  very  much  alike. 
In  fact  it  would  almost  seem  as  if  Plautus  used 
the  same  stock  scenes  and  motives  for  his  plays, 
varying  them  only  in  the  method  of  combination 
and  in  the  addition  of  extraneous  details.  Plau- 
tus recognized  the  delight  which  his  audience  felt 
in  seeing  somebody  fooled  or  acting  under  a  mis- 
apprehension of  some  kind,  as  in  the  Menaechmi, 
and  he  catered  to  this  taste.  There  are  many  pos- 
sibilities of  permutation  and  combination  in  the 
details  connected  with  such  a  plot  of  deception, 
and  Plautus  seems  to  have  realized  them  all.  How 
he  utilized  them  will  be  more  apparent  from  the 
following  study  of  the  interrelation  of  plan  and 
action  in  the  plays. 


CHAPTER  III 

Technique  of  Deception 

A.     Methods 

GIVEN  the  general  situation,  with  the  interests 
of  various  characters  at  stake,  and  those 
characters  by  the  help  of  various  assistants  attain- 
ing their  ends  through  deception,  varied  in  nature 
and  object,  it  still  remains  for  us  to  consider,  by 
a  detailed  study  of  the  comedies,  the  methods 
used  to  carry  out  that  deception.  Such  an  in- 
vestigation will  include  the  clearness  and  definite- 
ness  of  the  planning  and  execution  of  those 
methods;  and  should  such  investigation  reveal 
great  uniformity  in  methods  and  plans,  the  study 
of  any  unique  details  which  the  several  plays 
may  present.  All  three  of  these  considerations 
rest  primarily  upon  an  analysis  of  the  technique 
of  the  plays. 

I.     Lies 

Deception  generally  involves  lying,  and  so  it  is 
not  surprising  to  find  lies  constantly  employed  in 
all  the  plays  except  the  Menaechmi,  in  which,  as 
we  have  already  noted,  the  confusion  arises  from 
unconscious  deception.  Some  differentiation 
must  be  made,  however,  between  those  plays  in 
52 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        53 

which  lies  are  the  chief  basis  of  the  tricken',  as 
in  the  Bacchides,  and  those  in  which  they  are 
incidental,  and  are,  as  in  the  Miles,  additional 
means  in  the  execution  of  the  trickery.  To  the 
first  class  belong  the  Bacchides,  Epidicus,  Mos- 
tellaria,  Persa,  Truculentus.  All  the  rest  of  the 
plays,  of  course,  come  under  the  second  category. 

Bacchides.  In  the  Bacchides  we  have  seen 
that  the  deception  depends  first  upon  the  tale  of 
the  pirate  ship,  vv.277ff.,  by  which  Chrysalus  en- 
ables his  young  master  to  help  himself,  at  will,  to 
his  father's  money;  secondly,  the  same  slave, 
having  led  Nicobulus  to  spy  upon  his  son  ban- 
queting with  the  meretrices,  seizes  upon  the 
miles,  who  has  opportunely  arrived,  to  worry  the 
father  still  more  by  the  statement  that  he  is  the 
husband  of  his  son's  arnica. 

V.851.    Vir  hie  est  illius  mulieris  quacum  accu- 
bat. 

Epidicus.  In  the  Epidicus  it  is  impossible  to 
cite  only  a  few  lines  illustrative  of  the  point  un- 
der discussion,  as  lying  is  practically  the  basis 
of  all  the  trickery  in  the  play.  A  reference  to 
the  analysis  of  the  play  in  the  following  section 
will  bear  out  this  statement. 

Mostellaria.  As  in  the  Epidicus,  just  men- 
tioned, lying  is  the  basis  of  all  the  deception  in 
this  play,  though  because  of  the  greater  simplicity 
of  the  plot  it  is  easier  to  indicate  the  three  lies 
which  contribute  to  the  carrying  out  of  the  plot: 


54         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

(i)  The  tale  of  the  ghost  haunting  the  house, 
vv.475ff.,  acknowledged  by  Tranio  to  be  a  lie, 

V.510    Illisce  hodie  banc  conturbabunt  fabulam. 

(2)  The  pretended  purchase  of  the  neighbour- 
ing house, 

vv.637f Aedis  filius 

Tuos  emit. 

cf .  V.665     Calidum  hercle  esse  audiui  optumum 
mendacium 

(3)  The  pretended  purpose  of  Theopropides  to 
build  a.  gynaeceum,  whereby  Tranio  deceives  Simo, 

vv.754f sed  senex 

Gynaeceum  aedificare  uolt  hie  .... 

Persa.  In  the  Persa  the  lies  are  coincident 
with  the  personation  which  will  be  considered  be- 
low, so  they  need  no  special  mention  here. 

Truculentus 

vv.Ssff .     .  .  .  eo  nunc  commentast  dolum : 

Peperisse  simulat  sese,  ut  me  extrudat 

f oras : 
Eum     esse     simulat     militem     puero 
patrem : 

Here    pretense    and    lies    combine.     Inasmuch 
as  this  is  the  only  feature  of  deception  in  the 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        55 

play,  and,  as  has  been  noted  above,  deception  is 
not  the  chief  interest,  we  may  pass  over  the  play 
with  this  mere  statement. 

Lies  occur  in  other  plays ; — in  the  Trinummus, 
Stasimus  lies  about  the  farm;  in  the  Captivi, 
Tyndarus,  upon  the  arrival  of  Aristophontes,  is 
driven  to  some  new  astutia,  v.539,  in  order  to  ex- 
tricate himself,  and  so  to  bring  discredit  upon  his 
statements  asserts  that  his  accuser  is  mad, 
vv.547f.  Lies  are  all  the  more  convenient  to  aid 
in  the  deception  when  the  gullibility  of  the  senes 
in  the  plays  is  taken  into  consideration, — that 
gullibility  which  is  one  of  the  characteristic  traits 
of  the  old  man  as  portrayed  by  Plautus. 

2.     Personation 

This  is  the  assumption  by  a  character  of  a  role 
not  his  own,  and  it  is  only  an  elaborate  acting  of 
a  lie ;  it  is  the  favourite  method  of  deception  used 
by  Plautus.  Ten^  of  the  plays  present  this  fea- 
ture:— Amphitruo,  Asinaria,  Captivi,  Curculio, 
Epidicus,  Miles,  Persa,  Poenulus,  Pseudolus, 
Trinummus.^ 

Asinaria 

vv.367ff.    Nunc  tu  abi  ad  forum  ad  erum  et 
narra  haec  ut  nos  acturi  sumus : 

1  In  addition  deception  resulting  from  unconscious  per- 
sonation of  a  similar  kind  Is  found  in  the  Bacchldes, 
Caslna,  Mercator,  Truculentus.  cf.  Terence:  Eunuchus. 
Act  II  3;  Phormlo,  Act  I  2. 

2  cf.  Rudens,  w.l035£t. 


56  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Te  ex  Leonida  futurum  esse  atriensem 

Sauream, 
Dum  argentum  afferat  mercator  pro 

asinis. 

Here  the  slave  Leonida  impersonates  the  atriensis 
Saurea. 

Captivi 

vv.35ff.     Hisce    autem    inter    sese    confinxerunt 

dolum, 
Quo  pacto  hie  seruos  suom  erum  hinc 

amittat  domum: 
Itaque  inter  se  commutant  uestem  et 

nomina : 
lUic  uocatur  Philocrates,  hie  Tyndarus, 
Huius     illic,     hie     illius     hodie     fert 

imaginem, 

This  explains  the  exchange  of  roles  between  the 
master  and  the  slave. 

Curculio 

from  the  speech  of  the  miles 

vv.345ff.     "Dedisti      tu      argentum?"     inquam. 
"Immo  apud  trapezitam  situmst 
Ilium  quem  dixi  Lyconidem,  atque  ei 
mandaui,  qui  anulo 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        57 

Meo  tabellas  obsignatas  attulisset,  ut 

daret 
Operam,  ut  mulierem  a  lenone  cum 

auro  et  ueste  abduceret." 

results  the  personation  by  Curculio  of  the  mes- 
senger from  the  miles  in  Act  III, 

V.408    Ab  Therapontigone  Platagidoro  milite. 
V.412     Libertus  ilUus,  quern  omnes  Summanum 
uocant. 

Epidicus 

vv.87f Ego  miser  perpuli 

Meis   dolis    senem,    ut    censeret    suam 
sese  emere  filiam, 

Here  the  fidicina  has  been  received  by  Periphanes 
as  his  daughter,  before  the  play  begins,  and  he 
believes  in  her  until  v.580. 

vv.37iff lam  ego  parabo 

Aliquam    dolosam   fidicinam,    nummo 

conducta  quae  sit, 
Quae  se  emptam  simulet,  quae  senes 

duo  docte  ludificetur. 

Through  the  personation  by  a  second  fidicina  of 
the  arnica  of  Stratippocles'  fancy,  bought  at  Peri- 
phanes' orders,  Epidicus  plots  the  deception  of 
his  master  a  second  time. 

Miles.    The  Miles  contains  three  instances  of 
personation : 


58  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

(i)  the  twin-sister  trick, 

vv.i5off.     Et  mox  ne  erretis,  haec  duarum  hodie 

uicem 
Et  hinc  et  illinc  mulier  feret  imaginem 
Atque   eadem   erit,   uerum   alia   esse 

adsimulabitur 
Ita  sublinetur  os  custodi  mulieris. 

(2)  the  meretrix  Acroteleutium  personates  the 
wife  of  the  old  man  Periplecomenus, 

vv.766ff mihi  opus  est  opera  tua, 

Periplecomene :  nam  ego  inueni  lepi- 
dam  sycophantiam, 

V.782        Ecquam  tu  potis  reperire  forma  lepida 
mulierem, 

vv.792f adsimuletque  se 

Tuam  esse  uxorem: 

(3)  Pleusicles    personates    the    nauclerus    to 
facilitate  his  abduction  of  Philocomasium : 

V.I  177     Facito   uti   uenias   ornatu  hue   ad   nos 
nauclerico ; 

vv.i285f uerear  magis 

Me  amoris  causa  hoc  ornatu  incedere. 

Persa 

vv.i48flf.     Praemonstra     docte,     praecipe     astu 
filiae, 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        59 

Quid  fabuletur:  ubi  se  natam  prae- 

dicet, 
Qui  sibi  parentes   fuerint,  unde  sur- 

rupta  sit. 

Here  the  parasite's  daughter  is  to  be  instructed 
as  to  her  personation,  for  the  pretended  sale  and 
subsequent  claim  and  ransom  by  her  father. 

Poenulus.  The  personation  is  carried  out  by 
Hanno,  the  Carthaginian,  as  the  father  of  the 
girls,  who  claims  them  his  daughters.  The  re- 
sulting anagnorisis  proves  this  to  be  the  case.^ 

vv.i099ff.     Nunc  hoc  consilium  capio  et  banc 
fabricam  apparo, 
Vt  te  allegemus :  filias  dicas  tuas 
Surruptasque  esse  paruolas  Cartha- 

gine, 
Manu  liberali  causa  ambas  adseras, 
Quasi  filiae  tuae  sint  ambae. 

Pseudolus 

vv.75iflf ubi  hominem  exomauero, 

Subditiuom    fieri    ego    ilium    militis 

seruom  uolo : 
Symbolum    hunc    ferat    lenoni    cum 

quinque  argenti  minis, 
Mulierem  ab  lenone  abducat: 

3  cf.  Terence:  Andrla,  V  3,  v.892,  where  Simo  accuses 
Pamphllus  of  a  similar  plot  against  himself,  to  prove  that 
Mysls  is  a  free-born  citizen. 


6o  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Trinummus 

A  man  is  hired  for  a  three-penny  bit,  which 
gives  the  name  to  the  play,  to  bring  money  and 
letters,  presumably  from  the  girl's  father, 
vv.765ff. 

Because  of  the  prominence  of  this  sort  of  de- 
ception in  the  comedies,  it  is  desirable  to  sum  up 
here  and  to  compare  the  occurrences.  The  in- 
stances of  personation  fall  into  several  classes : — 

(i)  Those  in  which  a  real  person  is  imitated, 
without  his  knowledge,  and  either  his  appearance 
or,  in  the  cases  where  an  agent  of  a  certain  char- 
acter is  impersonated,  the  appearance  of  the  mas- 
ter or  employer  brings  about  the  revelation  of  the 
deception.  In  this  class  are  the  Amphitruo, 
Asinaria,  Curculio,  Epidicus,  Pseudolus,  Trinum- 
mus. In  the  Asinaria,  to  be  sure,  no  such  con- 
clusion occurs,  and  the  personation  attains  the 
desired  end,  though  retributive  justice  is  not 
meted  out  to  the  trickster,  but  to  the  old  man  who 
helped  the  trickster's  plans.  No  obscurity  re- 
sults, however,  from  the  unanticipated  change  in 
the  course  of  the  action. 

(2)  Those  in  which  impersonation  is  entered 
upon  by  mutual  consent,  as  in  the  Captivi,  and 
the  intervention  of  a  third  person,  Aristophontes, 
reveals  the  deception,  which  however  turns  out 
fortunately,  in  the  final  anagnorisis. 

(3)  Those  in  which  the  imposture  concerns  an 
imaginary  person,  as  in  the  Miles,  Persa  and 
Poenulus.  Here  there  is  accordingly  no  possi- 
bility of  discovery  as  in  the  other  two  classes,  but 
the  outcome  is  either  the  attainment  of  the  de- 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        6i 

sired  end,  as  in  the  Miles  and  Persa,  or  the 
change  of  pretense  to  fact  as  in  the  Poenulus. 

In  this  respect  the  Epidicus  alone  of  all  the 
plays  shows  apparent  inconsistencies  and  ob- 
scurities ; — in  Periphanes'  ready  acceptance  of 
the  fidicina  represented  to  him  by  his  slave  Epidi- 
cus to  be  his  daughter,  and  in  the  abandonment 
by  the  second  fidicina  of  the  role  planned  for  her 
by  Epidicus,  when  the  necessity  arises  for  her  to 
play  it.  Further  comment  upon  this  point  is  re- 
served for  section  B. 

A  connection  exists,  to  be  sure,  between  per- 
sonation in  the  sense  in  which  we  have  been  dis- 
cussing it,  i.  e.  imposture,  and  the  unconscious 
deception  on  the  part  of  the  personator,  as  in  the 
Menaechmi  and  in  those  plays  having  anagnorisis. 
All  three  kinds  of  personation  possess  an  impor- 
tant common  element  for  the  audience.  The 
audience  is  in  the  secret,  except  in  the  case  of 
"surprise"  anagnorisis — possible  in  the  Curculio 
and  Epidicus  ( ?),  and  the  enjoyment  comes  from 
the  fact  that  the  audience  beholds  characters  act- 
ing under  misapprehension  as  to  each  other's 
identity,  or  misapprehending  the  identity  of  one 
character.  The  Menaechmi  affords  the  purest 
illustration  of  this,  since  the  twins,  all  uncon- 
scious themselves,  are  constantly  mistaken  for 
each  other,  cf.  Simo  in  the  Mostellaria,  as 
Theopropides  views  him. 

Where  anagnorisis  is  approaching,  the  audience 
derives  added  enjoyment  from  the  knowledge 
that  the  persons  concerned  are  not  aware  of  each 
other's  identity, — e.  g.,  the  recognition  between 


62         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Hegio  and  Tyndarus  in  the  Captivi.  So  in  pur- 
posed personation  this  element  persists.  For  ex- 
ample in  the  Bacchides,  the  audience  knows  that 
Bacchis  is  not  the  wife  of  the  soldier,  or  to  take 
a  better  case,  they  know  that  Simla  is  not  the 
real  Harpax  in  the  Pseudolus.  In  cases  of  this 
last  type  the  chief  enjoyment  comes  from  noting 
the  perils  and  cleverness  of  the  impostor  while 
he  plays  his  part.  In  such  cases  the  old  tragic 
irony  has  often  been  diverted  to  comic  purposes, 
though  in  the  Captivi  much  of  the  original  pathos 
remains. 

Judging  from  the  majority  of  the  plays,  there- 
fore, we  may  conclude  that  a  careful  working 
out  of  this  sort  of  deception  is  characteristic  of 
Plautus.  How  far  this  conclusion  affects  our 
judgment  of  the  Plautinity  of  the  Epidicus,  in  its 
present  condition,  is  another  question  and  one 
which  we  will  not  endeavour  to  settle  here. 

3.  Letters 

Letters,  for  the  most  part  forged,  play  an  im- 
portant part  in  the  trickery  of  the  Bacchides, 
Curculio,  and  Trinummus.  Since  in  each  case 
the  contents  of  the  letters  are  quoted,  or  implied, 
within  the  play  and  form  an  integral  part  of  the 
dialogue,  it  is  unnecessary  to  cite  them  here  in 
detail. 

4.  Theft. 

Theft  as  a  means  of  carrying  out  deception  is 
found  in  the  Asinaria  and  the  Persa. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        63 

Asinaria.  In  this  play  the  act  of  theft  is  ren- 
dered possible  by  the  personation,  which  has  al- 
ready been  mentioned  as  a  feature  of  the  trickery, 
in  giving  the  pseudo-Saurea  an  opportunity  to  ap- 
propriate the  money  which  was  paid  for  the  asses, 

vv335flF.     Em,    ergo    is    argentum   hue    remisit, 
quod  daretur  Saureae 
Pro  asinis : 

358ff.     Quid  nunc  consili  captandum  censes? 
die.     Li.     Em  istuc  ago, 
Quo    modo    argento    interuortam    et 
aduentorem  et  Sauream. 

Persa.  In  the  Persa  the  purchase-money  for 
the  oxen  is  appropriated  by  the  slave  Sagaristio, 

vv.259fif.  Nam  erus  mens  me  Eretriam  misit, 
domitos  boues  ut  sibi  mercarer : 

Dedit  argentum:  nam  ibi  mercatum 
dixit  esse  die  septumei : 

Stultus,  qui  hoc  mihi  daret  argentum 
quoius  ingenium  nouerat. 

Nam  hoc  argentum  alibi  abutar. 

5.     Miscellaneous 

A  few  cases  of  deception  effected  by  unique 
methods  occur  in  the  plays. 

Gambling.  In  the  Curculio,  Curculio  wins 
from  the  miles  the  ring  which  helps  him  in  the 
later  trick  of  personation : 


64  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

vv.355f.     Prouocat  me    in    aleam,    ut    ego    lu- 
dam.  .  .  . 
Ille  suom  anulum  opposiuit, 

Secret  passage.     In  the  Miles : 

vv.i42f.     In  eo  conclaui  ego  perfodi  parietem, 
Qua  commeatus  clam  esset  hinc  hue 
mulieri. 

The  methods,  then,  employed  in  the  further- 
ance of  deception  are  many.  But  the  pre-emin- 
ence of  personation  and  lying  is  noteworthy. 
Moreover,  it  should  be  mentioned  that  all  the 
plays,  except  the  Mostellaria,  combine  two  or 
more  methods  even  when  there  is  only  one  end  in 
view.  This  is  to  be  differentiated  from  the  fact 
that  some  of  the  plays, — the  Bacchides,  Epidicus, 
Miles,  Persa,  Poenulus  and  Pseudolus, — contain 
two  or  three  tricks.  The  following  analysis  of 
the  inter-relation  of  plan  and  action  in  the  plays 
will  illustrate  this  point  more  fully. 


B.     Inter-relation  of  plans  and  completed  action 

Our  study  up  to  this  point  has  been  concerned 
with  the  various  elements  entering  into  deception 
and  it  has  shown  how  often  the  same  elements 
recur.  We  must  now  consider  their  arrange- 
ment in  the  several  plays,  that  is,  we  must  study 
the  inter-relation  of  plans  for  deception  and  the 
carrying  out  of  those  plans,  in  order  to  discover. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        65 

if  possible,  Plautus'  method  of  using  these  ele- 
ments to  work  out  his  plots.  It  should  be  noted 
that  the  following  analyses  differ  from  the  usual 
synopses  of  the  plots  given  in  editions  of  the 
plays  in  that  they  have  trickery  as  the  centre  of 
interest.  Also,  inasmuch  as  a  consideration  of 
dropped  threads  of  deception  leads  very  natural- 
ly to  the  question  of  contaminatio,  we  may  an- 
ticipate the  discussion  of  that  problem  in  section 
IV.  and  deal  with  it  in  part  at  the  end  of  the 
analysis  of  each  individual  play. 

Bacchides 

The  course  of  the  trickery  of  the  Bacchides 
was  traced  in  the  analysis  of  that  play  given  in 
section  I,  and  it  is  unnecessary  to  repeat  it  here. 
There  are  no  dropped  threads  connected  with  the 
trickery  nor  is  there  reason  for  believing  that 
contaminatio  exists  in  the  play.^  In  this  play  as 
in  all  the  plays  the  inconsistencies  noted  by  Lan- 
gen^  and  others  must,  however,  be  considered  to 
determine  whether  such  discrepancies  are  found 
in  points  essential  to  the  carrying-out  of  the 
trickery  or  only  in  non-essentials. 

The  first  inconsistency  which  Langen  notes^ 
concerns  Lydus'  attitude  towards  his  discipulus, 
Pistoclerus,  and  this  is  not  connected  with  the 
trickery.  The  unexplained  stay  of  two  years  on 
the  part  of  Mnesilochus,  vv.i7of.,  in  Ephesus, 


1  Leo;   R6m.   Lit.   pp.ll9fE. 

2  Plaut.   Stud.   pp.llOff. 


a  Ibid.  p.llOf. 


66  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

which  obliged  him  to  entrust  his  affaires  de  coeur 
to  his  friend,  is  just  the  sort  of  time-element* 
which  Plautus  is  inclined  to  disregard.'  For 
verification  of  this  statement  it  is  necessary  to 
refer  to  several  of  the  plays. 

In  the  Captivi  the  length  of  time  required  for 
the  prisoners  to  make  their  plans,  prologue,  v.37, 
and  to  change  their  clothes  for  the  assumption  of 
each  other's  rqle  is  not  considered  by  the  play- 
wright. Likewise  the  length  of  time  required  for 
a  journey  to  and  from  Elis  is  improbably  set  as 
one  day,  though  this  may  be  used,  as  has  been 
suggested,  to  show  that  the  action  covers  more 
than  one  day.  In  the  Curculio  the  same  thing  is 
true  of  the  length  of  time  required  for  a  journey 
to  and  from  Caria,  though  in  this  case  the  lack  of 
knowledge  as  to  the  site  of  the  Caria  in  question 
renders  the  chronological  difficulty  uncertain.  In 
the  Miles  the  three  years  of  absence,  v.350,  seem 
too  long  for  the  few  incidents  allotted  to  that 
time,  vv. 1 2 1- 142.  A  similar  disregard  for  time 
is  seen  in  the  Mostellaria,  as  will  be  apparent  in 
the  later  analysis  of  the  play.  The  element  of 
time,  which  is  immaterial  to  the  progress  of  the 
plot  of  deception,  is  therefore  frequently  disre- 
garded by  Plautus.     As  such  disregard  does  not 

4  cf.  A.  Polczyk:  De  unltatibus  et  loci  et  temporis  in 
Nova  Comoedla  observatis,  Diss.  1909,  Viadrina  Uratis- 
lavlensi,  pp.38f.  M.  Brasse:  Quatenus  in  fabulis  Plautinis 
et  loci  et  temporis  unltatibus  species  veritatis  neglegetur. 
Diss.   Breslau.   1914,  pp.87f. 

8  cf.  Terence:  Eunuchus,  w.580fE.,  all  the  incidents 
crowded  Into  the  short  tinie  between  the  departure  of 
Thais  and  Thraso  and  Chaerea's  entrance. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        67 

affect  the  course  of  the  trickery  it  need  not,  for 
our  purpose,  be  explained  away,  though  that 
might  be  done  in  some  cases,  as  in  the  Asinaria, 
cf.  the  following  analysis. 

Nicobulus'  acceptance  of  the  state  of  affairs 
resulting  from  his  son's  failure  to  bring  home 
the  money  from  Ephesus,  in  spite  of  his  re- 
luctance at  his  age  to  undertake  a  sea-voyage® 
and  his  failure  to  think  of  entrusting  the  matter 
a  second  time  to  his  son,  are  unimportant.  Chry- 
salus'  ready  revelation  to  Nicobulus  of  his  son's 
whereabouts,  vv.347f.,  when  the  success  of  the 
plan  of  deception  depends  upon  Chrysalus'  keep- 
ing father  and  son  apart  until  he  has  himself  re- 
vealed that  plan  to  the  latter,  contradicts,  to  be 
sure,  that  slave's  cleverness  as  displayed  in  other 
matters.  But  inasmuch  as  the  playwright  ap- 
parently so  arranged  the  action  that  the  slave  and 
his  young  master  meet  before  the  son  and  father, 
we  can  regard  the  inconsistency  as  the  sort  of 
carelessness  which  Plautus  shows  in  non-essen- 
tials. The  requirement  which  Langen  makes,^  that 
the  poet  should  have  informed  the  audience  if 
some  other  place  of  meeting  than  the  place  men- 
tioned by  Chrysalus  to  Nicobulus  had  been  agreed 
upon  by  the  slave  and  his  young  master,  may  be 
accepted  by  a  critical  reader  of  the  play.  But  such 
possible  difficulties  Plautus  constantly  disregard- 
ed. In  other  words,  Plautus  centres  his  attention 
upon  the  action  as  he  develops  it,  not  as  it  might 
develop  without  his  guiding  supervision  of  it. 

6  Langen:  Plaut.   Stud.  p.ll2. 

7  Ibid,   p.113. 


68  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Plautus'  disregard  of  time  is  again  illustrated 
in  Act  II  2  and  3.  In  v.374  Lydus  states  that  he 
stayed  only  a  short  time  in  Bacchis'  house,  yet 
the  actual  time  allows  the  action  of  Act  II, 
scenes  2  and  3,  which  according  to  stage  economy 
is  comparatively  long.  As  Langen  himself 
acknowledges,*  the  difficulty  is  not  serious  enough 
to  throw  doubt  on  v.374  as  un-PIautine.  J.  Baar^ 
attributed  it  to  contaminatio,  but  hardly  with 
sufficient  reason.^" 

In  V.406  Philoxenus  asks  Lydus,  "Quo  sequar? 
quo  ducis  nunc  me?"  though  it  is  quite  evident 
that  he  knew  where  Lydus  was  taking  him,  from 
their  leaving  the  house  together  intent  upon  a 
definite  purpose.  The  question,  therefore,  is 
given  merely  for  the  sake  of  the  answer,  which 
repeats  for  the  benefit  of  the  audience  what  the 
two  had  evidently  been  discussing  before  they 
came  out  of  the  house.  So  too,  in  v.410, 
Philoxenus  reproaches  himself  for  the  evil  ways 
of  his  youth,  as  also  in  vv.io79f.  Yet  Lydus 
had  previously  extolled  his  blamelessness  of  life, 
vv.42off.  The  contradiction  may  be  easily  ex- 
plained by  a  desire  on  the  part  of  Philoxenus  to 
excuse  his  son's  actions  by  the  implication  of 
"like  father,  like  son." 

The  psychological  improbability  of  Nicobulus' 
answer  to  Chysalus'  spiteful  question,  vv.837f., 
so  briefly   acknowledging  the   attractiveness   of 

8  Ibid,  p.113. 

9  De  Bacchidibus  Plautina  auaestiones.  Diss  MUnster, 
1891.     Chap.  IV. 

10  O.  Seyffert  in  Bursian's  Jahresbericht,  1895,  Part  II. 
p.l4. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        69 

Bacchis  in  spite  of  his  anger  at  her  seduction  of 
his  son,  does  not  concern  the  question  of  the  de- 
ception. Nor  does  the  improbabiUty  of  the  con- 
clusion of  the  play  when  the  old  men  themselves 
fall  a  prey  to  the  charmers  from  whom  they  had 
come  to  rescue  their  sons. 

The  fact  that  Chrysalus  must  apparently  urge 
Nicobulus  on  to  pay  off  the  soldier,  v.883,  when 
the  latter  has  been  so  eager  to  do  so,  vv.866ff., 
though  inconsistent,  as  Langen  points  out,  is 
probably  introduced  by  Plautus  to  emphasize 
once  more  Chrysalus'  individual  manipulation 
of  all  the  plans  of  deception  and  their  execution. 
Though  apparently  contradictory,  it  is  the  sort 
of  thing  which  would  justify  the  claim  that  the 
focus  of  the  Plautine  plays  is  upon  the  trickster 
and  his  deceptions.  This  is  particularly  true  of 
the  Bacchides,  since  the  play  is  so  largely  a  char- 
acter-study of  the  slave  Chrysalus.^^ 

From  this  discussion  of  the  Bacchides  it  is 
evident  that  in  spite  of  the  involved  play  and  in- 
ter-play of  plan  and  action  in  the  comedy,  all  the 
carrying  out  of  the  deception  is  anticipated  by 
some  plan  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  play,  and  vice 
versa  the  plans  outlined  in  the  earlier  part  of  the 
play  are  carried  out  in  the  subsequent  action. 
This  is  particularly  noteworthy  inasmuch  as  the 
play  contains  really  two  main  tricks. 

Asinaria 

The  object  of  the  trickery  in  the  Asinaria  is 
to  get  money  (20  minae) 

11  Lorenz;  Pseudolus,  ed.  Introd.  p.28. 


70         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

vv.89f .     Viginti  iam  usust  filio  argenti  minis : 
Face  id  ut  paratum  sit. 

for  the  youth  Argyrippus,  son  of  Demaenetus  and 
Artemona,  who  is  in  love  with  Philaenium,  the 
daughter  of  a  lena.  The  father  is  ready  to  help 
his  son,  VV.67,  82f.,  I23f.,  but,  being  powerless 
since  his  wife  keeps  the  money-bag,  vv.85ff.,  he 
enlists  the  services  of  Libanus  his  slave,  and 
Leonida, 

v.ioi     Tibi  optionem  sumito  Leonidam: 

with  a  promise  to  assist  as  far  as  is  in  his  power, 

vv.io6f.     Tun  redimes  me,  si  me  hostes  inter- 
ceperint  ? 
De.     Redimam. 

The  two  slaves  evolve  a  plan,  vv.249ff.,  when 
Leonida  discovers  that  a  merchant  who  had 
bought  some  asses  from  Saurea,  Artemona's 
atriensis,  had  sent  his  messenger  with  the  sum — 
20  minae.  Leonida  plans  to  impersonate  Saurea 
and  to  relate  the  plan  to  the  old  man,  vv.368f. ; 
V.380. 

Still  more  luckily,  when  the  mercator  inquires 
for  Demaenetus  and  Saurea,  Leonida  at  once 
pretends  to  be  Saurea.  At  this  point  the  audience 
is  allowed  to  hear  twice  that  the  mercator  knew 
Demaenetus  but  not  Saurea,  vv.348;  353.  Yet 
in  spite  of  Leonida's  assertion  that  he  is  Saurea, 
the  mercator  refuses  to  pay  the  money  to  anyone 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        71 

but  Demaenetus.  Leonida  narrates  all  this  to 
Libanus,  vv.357ff.,  with  the  news  of  the  mer- 
cator's  imminent  arrival. 

Just  as  Leonida  starts  to  the  forum  to  acquaint 
Demaenetus  with  the  plan  which  he  and  Libanus 
have  made,  the  mercator  is  seen  approaching  and 
the  slaves  are  forced  to  act  at  once.  ( Such  need 
for  haste  at  a  crisis  is  often  introduced  to  in- 
crease the  effect  of  cleverness  on  the  part  of  the 
trickster).  Leonida  hurries  off  to  the  forum, 
while  Libanus  engages  the  mercator  in  conversa- 
tion. The  latter  repeats  what  had  just  been  re- 
ported by  Leonida,  that  he  is  seeking  Demaene- 
tus or  Saurea,  vv.392f .,  to  pay  20  minae  for  asses, 
vv.396f.,  a  repetition  for  the  sake  of  clearness. 
Libanus  takes  this  opportunity  of  preparing  for 
the  ensuing  personation  by  describing  Leonida  as 
Saurea,  vv.398ff. 

In  the  personation  scene  which  follows.  Act  II 
4,  Leonida  plays  the  high  and  mighty  atriensis, 
Saurea,  and  is  ably  assisted  by  Libanus.  The 
fact  of  imposture  is  kept  before  the  audience  by 
the  asides,^^  vv.446f.,  471,  between  the  two  slaves 
as  they  coach  each  other.  The  mercator  is  ap- 
parently convinced,  but  still  refuses  to  pay  the 
money  to  anyone  but  Demaenetus,  vv.487f.  The 
actual  payment  takes  place  off  the  stage,  as  the 
audience  is  carefully  informed,  vv.58iff.,  when 
Demaenetus  confirms  the  statements  of  the  slaves. 

In  the  meantime  Argyrippus  starts  out  in 
search  of  help  on  his  own  account, 

18  cf.  Leg^rand:  Daos,  p.  548. 


72         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

v,245     Nunc  pergam  ad  forum  atque  experiar 
opibus,  omni  copia. 

V.248     Nam    si    mutuas    non    potero,    certumst 
sumam  faenore. 

but  his  efforts  are  fruitless  and  the  lovers  are  ex- 
tricated from  their  difficulties  by  Libanus.  The 
condition  which  he  imposes,  however,  that  De- 
maenetus  shall  share  the  success  of  his  son,  v.735, 
is  carried  out  in  the  concluding  banquet-scene. 

As  in  some  of  the  other  plays,  the  Persa  for 
example,  the  trickster  disappears  from  the  play 
unpunished,  and  Artemona's  anger  at  the  end  is 
vented  upon  her  husband  not  because  of  her  loss 
but  because  of  her  jealousy,  when  guided  by  the 
defeated  rival  for  Philaenium's  affections  she 
finds  him  banqueting  with  the  girl  and  Argyrip- 
pus.  Aside  from  that,  all  the  plans  for  the  ac- 
tion are  carried  out  except  Argyrippus'  efforts 
in  his  own  behalf;  for  Act  III  3,  especially 
V.631,  proves  that  he  had  accomphshed  nothing. 
That  failure  merely  emphasizes  his  passive  role 
in  the  play  in  contrast  to  the  very  active  part  of 
Libanus,  the  trickster. 

This  last  point  Langen^^  has  included  among 
the  inconsistencies  in  the  play,  inasmuch  as  by  his 
determination  to  secure  aid  for  himself  Argyrip- 
pus seems  to  have  forgotten  that  he  had  already 
appealed  to  his  father  for  help,  as  is  evident  from 
the  old  man's  desire  to  assist  his  son,  vv.57ff. 
(Note   the    anger   of    the    youth    at   the   time, 

13  Plaut.  stud.  p.lOOf, 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        73 

vv.243ff.,  when  such  a  wild  determination  suits 
his  mood,  although  he  is  really  helpless.)  But 
the  solution  of  this  difficulty  is  not  vital  to  the 
progress  of  the  trickery,  which  is  not  in  the 
youth's  hands. 

Likewise  it  is  inconsistent  that  Demaenetus 
should  know  the  sum  of  money^*  needed  by  his 
son,  vv.74f.,  before  the  latter  apparently  knew 
the  sum,  v. 229.  All  the  discussion  attendant  upon 
an  explanation  of  this  contradiction  is  not  per- 
tinent to  the  trickery,  for  the  exact  sum  is  a  mere 
detail.  Demaenetus  knew  that  his  son  needed 
money.  The  same  is  true  of  Libanus'  unmotiv- 
ated departure  to  the  forum  at  the  end  of  Act  I 
i,^^  as  also  of  the  haste  of  Leonida  when  seeking 
Libanus,  Act  II  2,  and  his  contradictory  slowness 
in  coming  to  the  point  of  his  business.  Business 
transactions  carried  on  in  the  public  highway,  as 
here,  are  the  counterpart  of  the  toilet-scenes  in 
some  of  the  other  plays,  impossible  according  to 
our  dramatic  proprieties,  as  Langen  says,  but 
quite  common  in  the  ancient  drama. 

In  the  Asinaria,  as  in  the  Bacchides,  a  disre- 
gard of  the  lapse  of  time  is  noted  by  Langen^*  in 
vv.367ff.,  where  within  the  space  of  twenty-five 
verses  Leonida  is  off  to  the  forum,  finds  De- 
maenetus there,  and  relates  to  him  the  plan  con- 
cocted by  the  slaves.  But  this  is  not  altogether 
impossible,  as  it  was  carefully  arranged,  vv.ii6f., 
I25f.,  that  Demaenetus  should  be  at  the  banker's. 

14  Ibid.  pp.97f. 

15  Plaut.   Stud.  pp.98f. 

16  Ibid,  p.102. 


74         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Moreover  the  distance  from  Demaenetus'  house 
to  the  forum  is  not  stated.  So  why  find  a  dis- 
crepancy here? 

Langen^^  frequently  accuses  Plautus  of  strain- 
ing psychological  probability  for  the  sake  of 
comic  effect.  An  examination  of  these  occur- 
rences is  necessary  to  determine  whether  they 
affect,  or  in  any  way  are  concerned  with,  the 
progress  of  the  plot  of  deception.  Two  such 
psychological  impossibilities  have  already  been 
mentioned  in  the  study  of  the  Bacchides.  Both 
of  them  are  connected  merely  with  the  love  in- 
trigue and  do  not  involve  the  trickery.  In  the 
Captivi,  Langen  finds  another  such  instance  in 
Hegio's  investigation  of  the  facts  connected  with 
the  lives  of  the  captives  after  his  apparent  accept- 
ance of  Philocrates'  statements  and  the  depar- 
ture of  Philocrates. 

Langen  also  brands  as  psychologically  improb- 
able those  scenes  where  a  slave  in  haste  to  make 
some  announcement,  as  in  the  Mercator  or  the 
Asinaria,  wastes  time  in  soliloquizing  or  in 
wrangling.  The .  impression,  however,  upon  an 
audience  is  just  that  which  Plautus  worked  to 
produce, — amusement  at  the  wrangling  and  not 
annoyance  at  the  unwarranted  interruption  of 
the  action,  which  an  uncritical  audience  would 
fail  to  notice.^* 

In  the  Mostellaria,  the  improbability  upon 
which  the  success  of  the  ghost  story  rests,  that 

17  Ibid,   p.103. 

18  C.  Welssman:  De  servl  currentis  persona,  Gissae, 
1911. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        75 

Theopropides  should  not  know  of  such  a  fact 
connected  with  his  own  house,  or  the  improba- 
bility of  his  not  knowing  the  plan  of  his  neigh- 
bour's house,  are  disregarded  for  the  sake  of  the 
comic  situation  which  results  from  such  ignor- 
ance. These  improbabilities  differ,  to  be  sure, 
from  those  previously  mentioned  in  that  they  are 
an  integral  part  of  the  process  of  deception.  But 
they  illustrate  all  the  better  Plautus'  method  of 
disregarding  verisimilitude  for  comic  effect,  a 
small  detail  for  the  sake  of  the  whole.  Besides, 
Theopropides  is  inepte  stultus,  v.495,  as  his 
credulity  throughout  the  entire  play  shows. 

Similarly  improbabilities  are  admitted  in  sev- 
eral of  the  other  plays,  where  the  exigencies 
of  the  plot  demand  them,  as  in  the  Curculio, 
when  the  slave  wins  the  ring  from  the  soldier, 
and  in  the  Pseudolus  when  the  trickster  obtains 
the  letter  and  the  symbolus.  But  it  is  evident 
that  these  improbabilities  are  intentionally  al- 
lowed by  Plautus,  intent  upon  the  effect  which  he 
aimed  to  produce.  Such  being  the  case,  it  is 
necessary  merely  to  note  their  presence  and  not 
to  endeavour  to  explain  them  away. 

Captivi  Realizing  Hegio's  intention  of  send- 
ing one  of  his  Elean  captives  back  to  Elis  to  ar- 
range for  an  exchange  of  prisoners  for  his  son 
who  is  held  captive  in  that  country,  Philocrates 
and  Tyndarus,  the  captivi,  have  exchanged  roles, 
cf.  w.35ff.,  222ff.,  to  win  the  former's  freedom, 
vv.4of.  Both  Tyndarus'  speech,  w.23iff.,  and 
Philocrates',  vv.24off.,  emphasize  the  fact  of  the 


76         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

exchange,  clearly  and  definitely,  though  the  plans 
for  that  exchange,  from  the  contents  of  the 
verses  just  cited,  were  made  before  the  action  of 
the  play  begins,^^  since  there  is  so  definite  an  un- 
derstanding between  the  slave  and  his  master. 
The  repetition  of  the  plan  in  vv.223ff.,  is  for  the 
benefit  of  the  audience,  since  the  situation  is  so 
confusing.  The  inconsistency  in  the  time  noted 
by  Langen  and  discussed  above  is  of  the  sort,  as 
has  been  already  noted,  found  in  the  other  plays 
and  does  not  affect  the  action. 

The  plan  is  successfully  carried  out,  Act  11 
2,  cf. 

v.276    Vt     facete     orationem     ad     seruitutem 
contulit, 

while  Tyndarus  in  his  asides,  vv.276,  284,  keeps 
before  the  audience  the  fact  of  deception  carried 
out  through  the  interchange  of  roles. 

vv.305f.     Me  qui  liber  fueram  seruom  fecit,  e 
summo  infumum. 
Qui  imperare  insueram  nunc  alterius 
imperio  obsequor 

would  be  especially  appreciated  by  the  audience 
because  of  the  contrast  between  them  and  the 
true  state  of  things  of  which  they  are  aware. 
But  the  trick  is  discovered.  Act  III  3  and  4, 
through  the  recognition  of  Tyndarus  by  Aristo- 
phontes,  another  Elean  captive  whom  Hegio  had 

19    Langen:  Plaut.  Stud,  pp.llfif. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        yy 

lodged  in  his  brother's  house,  v.458.  The  dis- 
covery involves  the  astutia  of  Tyndarus,  v. 539, 
of  pretending  that  Aristophontes  is  mad  in  order 
to  avoid  detection  himself,  vv.547f.  But  the 
astutia  fails  and  the  trickster  is  punished.  The 
thread  of  deception  is  carried  through  to  the  end, 
Act  IV  2,  by  Hegio's  shame  at  being  so  easily 
duped. 

It  should  be  noted  how  the  interchange  of 
roles,  of  which  the  audience  is  fully  informed 
but  of  which  Hegio  knows  nothing,  is  kept  con- 
stantly before  the  audience  by  just  such  am- 
biguous statements  as  have  been  cited, 

vv.4i3f.     Quo   pacto   emisisti    e   uinculis   tuom 
erum  tua  sapientia. 
Phil.     Feci  ego  ista  ut  commemoras  et 
te  meminisse  id  gratumst  mihi. 

435f.     Quom  me  seruom  in  seruitute  pro  ted 
hie  reliqueris 
Tuque  te  pro  libero  esse  ducas,  .   .   . 

The  use  of  the  aside,  as  in  v.276  quoted  above, 
or  as  in, 

v.284.     Salua   res   est:   philosophatur  quoque 
iam,  non  mendax  modost, 

referring  to  the  carrying  out  of  the  plan  of  de- 
ception, or  aiding  and  abetting  it  as  in  the  Asin- 
aria  where  the  two  slaves,  Leonida  and  Libanus, 
spur  each  other  on  in  their  efforts  to  outwit  the 


78         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

mercator,  Act  II  4,  should  also  be  noted.  Thus 
the  trick  is  kept  before  the  audience.  An  ex- 
amination of  the  other  plays  shows  similar  oc- 
currences and  uses. 

In  the  Persa  Toxilus  spurs  on  the  virgo, 
vv.6o6f.,  and  comments  in  an  aside,  vv.622,  632, 
639,  645,  on  her  cleverness  in  such  a  way  as  to 
keep  before  the  audience  the  imposture.  In  the 
Pseudolus,  that  tricky  slave  declares  for  the  bene- 
fit of  the  audience  that  all  is  ready  for  the  execu- 
tion of  the  trick  against  Ballio,  v.958,  and  from 
his  vantage-point,  v.959,  he  observes  Simla's 
clever  duping  of  the  leno,  v.959,  with  apprehen- 
sion, at  first,  lest  Simla  make  a  slip,  v.984,  but 
with  complete  satisfaction  at  his  success,  as  he 
himself  acknowledges,  vv.ioi7fif.,  when  he  sums 
up  the  trick. 

The  Miles  likewise  presents  the  same  feature, 
Act  IV  6,  when  Acroteleutium  the  meretrix  be- 
fools the  miles.  Maid  and  mistress  spur  each 
other  on,  vv.i2i9f.,  and  again  the  audience 
knows  that  the  stage  is  set  for  the  trick, 

Tuomst  principium. 

Likewise  in  vv.  1343b  ff.,  the  recognition  between 
Philocomasium  and  Pleusicles  must  have  been  in 
an  aside,  the  purpose  of  which  was  to  keep  be- 
fore  the  audience  the  fact  that  the  nauclerus  is 
none  other  than  the  disguised  lover,  who  planned 
thus  to  add  one  more  point  to  the  discomfiture  of 
the  miles,  vv.1177. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        79 

This  use  of  the  aside  is  an  interesting  fea- 
ture^°  of  the  comedies  of  Plautus,  and  it  might 
be  analyzed  in  much  greater  detail  than  the  scope 
of  the  present  study  allows.  Yet  even  these  few 
illustrations  suffice  to  show  that  the  aside,  either 
as  a  soliloquy  or  as  an  exhortation  to  action,  was 
used  by  Plautus  very  much  as  it  is  used  by  play- 
wrights today,  to  focus  the  attention  of  the  au- 
dience more  closely  upon  the  immediate  action 
and  to  render  it  as  clear  as  possible. 

In  the  Captivi  there  are  a  few  unimportant  in- 
consistencies ;  for  example,  in  Acts  IV  and  V  the 
journey  from  Aetolia  to  Elis  and  back  is  repre- 
sented as  tciking  place  in  one  day.  But  as  we 
have  already  noted,  Plautus  is  inclined  to  dis- 
regard this  detail  of  time.'*^  The  slave's  haste 
also  lacks  motive,  as  does  Hegio's  investigation 
as  to  the  truth  of  Philocrates'  statements.  But 
as  Langen  is  forced  to  admit,  here  again  verisi- 
militude is  sacrificed  for  the  sake  of  comic  ef- 
fect, inasmuch  as  the  determination  of  Hegio 
leads  to  the  resultant  complication  between  Tyn- 
darus  and  Aristophanes,  which  is  extremely  en- 
tertaining but  which  would  not  have  been  pos- 
sible had  Hegio  sought  out  Aristophontes  before 
Philocrates'  departure. 

Such  apparent  forgetfulness  on  the  part  of  the 
poet  as  seen  in  vv.947f.,  where  Hegio  promises 
to  set  Tyndarus  free,  though  already  in  vv.33if., 


20  Legrand:    Daos,    p.    548;    O.    Schaffner:    De    aversuro 
loquendl  ratione  in  comoedla  Graeca,  Gissae,  1911,  p.20, 
ziBrlx:  Captivi,  ed.  Introd.  p.3  and  note. 


8o         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

he  had  assured  him  of  freedom,^^  or  where  Hegio 
sends  off  Philocrates  at  once  to  arrange  for  the 
exchange  of  prisoners,  when  in  w.34if.,  he  had 
decided  to  do  so,  ubi  erunt  indutiae,  is  character- 
istic of  a  poet  who  is  so  careless  in  minor  details. 
As  we  shall  see  from  further  study  of  the  other 
comedies,  "the  play's  the  thing",  and  with  Plau- 
tus  the  "play"  is  primarily  the  plot  of  deception. 
With  that  clearly  planned  and  carried  out,  and 
entertaining,  clearness  and  exactness  of  consist- 
ency in  minor  details  are  not  worth  considering. 

Casina  The  basis  of  the  trickery  in  this  play 
consists  in  plots  and  counter-plots  of  a  father 
and  son,  (the  son  does  not  appear  in  the  play,  cf. 
prologue  V.65)  who  are  rivals  for  the  affections 
of  Casina,  vv.48ff.  The  servants  of  the  two  assist 
and  abet  their  masters,  and  Cleostrata,  the  wife 
of  the  senex,  favours  her  son's  suit  and  works  in 
his  interests.  The  conflict  starts  in  Act  I  i  be- 
tween the  servants  of  the  rivals,  each  of  whom 
pretends  that  Casina  is  to  be  won  for  himself, 
not  for  his  master,  vv.52,  69,  55,  109,  and  each 
one  is  on  his  guard,  vv.92,  95,  against  the  other. 
Cleostrata,  as  already  stated,  vv.150,  155,  plans 
to  thwart  her  wayward  husband  in  his  desires 
and  enlists  her  friend  Myrrhina's  sympathy  and 
future  assistance,  vv.2isf. 

Suspicious  of  his  wife  before  this,  Lysidamus' 
conversation  with  her  in  Act  II  3  confirms  his 
belief  that  she  is  aware  of  his  plans, 

22Langen:  Plaut.  Stud.  pp.l23f. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        8i 

vv.277f.     .   .   .  subolet  hoc  iam  uxori,  quod  ego 
machinor : 
Propter  earn  rem  magis  armigero  dat 
operam  de  industria 

and  spurs  him  on  to  action,  i,  e.  to  determine 
Casina's  fate  by  lot-drawing,  vv.296£.,  especially 
as  Chalinus,  working  in  the  son's  interests,  re- 
fuses to  give  the  girl  to  Lysidamus,  vv.293f. 
The  plan  is  carried  out  in  Act  II  6  and  the  lot 
falls,  V.415,  to  Olympic,  that  is  to  the  father,  and 
Cleostrata  is  bidden  to  deck  the  bride  for  the 
wedding,  v.419,  while  Lysidamus  plans  a  retreat 
for  himself  and  the  bride  in  his  friend's  house, 
vv.477ff.,  cf. 

V.521     Fac  uacent  aedes. 

Chalinus,  though  defeated  in  the  lot-drawing, 
is  still  watchful,  v.436,  and  overhearing  the  con- 
versation of  his  enemies  and  their  real  plans. 
Act  II  8,  is  spurred  on  in  the  interests  of  his 
mistress  to  outwit  the  old  man  by  undoing  what 
has  been  done, 

vv.5i3f.     Quod  id  quod  paratumst,  ut  paratum 
ne  siet, 
Sitque  ei  paratum  quod  paratum  non 
erat. 

In  other  words,  we  are  definitely  informed  that 
the  previous  trick  shall  be  rendered  useless. 


82  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Informed  by  Chalinus  of  the  state  of  affairs, 
Cleostrata  lays  her  plans  to  outwit  her  husband 
and  his  colleagues,  vv.56of.,  590.  First  she  stirs 
up  trouble  between  her  husband  and  his  friend 
so  that  the  hospitality  of  his  friend's  house  is  no 
longer  open  to  him, 

V.561     Nam  ego  aliquid  contrahere  cupio  litigi 
inter  eos  duos. 

Then  she  invents  a  tale  of  Casina's  madness  and 
her  raving  threats,  vv.655ff.  But  this  scene  of 
the  maid's  disclosure  of  Casina's  condition, 
though  evidently  planned  as  prefatory  to  the  ac- 
tual appearance  of  Casina  in  that  condition,  is 
not  used  in  the  solution  of  the  plot,  and  the  scene 
consequently  lacks  motive.  Instead  Cleostrata 
plans  a  more  clever  stratagem  which  is  careful- 
ly outlined  beforehand,  vv.769ff.,  for  the  benefit 
of  the  audience,  of  the  personation  of  Casina  by 
the  armigerus,  who  is  to  be  given  to  the  senex  as 
the  bride.  The  preparations  include  all  those 
customary  for  a  wedding,  vv.774f.,  though  the 
fact  of  the  deception  is  kept  before  the  audience, 

vv.855ff.     Acceptae  bene  et  commode  eximus  in- 

tus 
Ludos  uisere  hue  in  uiam  nuptialis, 
Numquam     iccastor     ullo     die     risi 

adaeque 
Neque     hoc     quod     relicuomst     plus 

risuram  opinor. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        83 

cf.  vv.87iff.  The  trick  is  carried  out  to  a  suc- 
cessful close  and  the  old  man  is  worsted. 

Casina's  fate  is  cleared  up  in  the  epilogue, 
vv.ioi3f.,  so  all  the  threads  of  the  trickery  are 
caught  up  except  the  motiveless  raving-scene. 
The  reason  for  this  sudden  conclusion  in 
vv.ioo5f.,  should  be  noted, — hanc  ex  longa 
longiorem  ne  faciamus  fabulam.  This  together 
with  the  fact  that  the  prologue  contains  no  in- 
dication of  either  the  lot-drawing  or  the  imper- 
sonation, but  does  hint  at  the  final  agnorisis  men- 
tioned in  the  epilogue,  leads  Leo^^  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  Plautus  used  the  prologue  of  the 
original  Greek  play  in  spite  of  the  addition  of 
other  elements  which  made  a  farce  out  of  the 
comedy.^*  TeuffeP^  attributed  the  difficulty  to 
retractatio,  but  without  sufficient  reason.^' 

As  to  the  description  of  Casina's  madness 
which  RitschF^  already  had  noted  as  without 
motive  and  brought  in  merely  to  amuse  the  au- 
dience, Langen  points  out  correctly  that  such  in- 
consistencies are  characteristic  of  Plautine 
comedy,  as  we  have  seen,  and  not  remarkable  or 
unique  as  Ritschl  had  believed.  Moreover, 
Pardalisca,  vv.685ff.,  tells  the  audience  that  all  is 
false.  Such  is  true  also  of  the  other  dis- 
crepancies, pointed  out  by  Langen,^*  in  the  disre- 

23  Plaut.   Forsch.  pp.207ff. 

24  Ibid,  p.168. 

25  Stud.  u.  Char.  pp.321f. 

26  Langen:   Plaut.   Stud.  pp.2781t. 

27  Opusc.  II  p.746. 

28  Plaut.  Stud.  pp.l271t. 


84  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

gard  for  the  lapse  of  time  between  Act  III  i  and 
3 ;  in  the  changes  in  the  characterization  of 
Myrrhina;  in  the  motiveless  speeches.  One 
other  difficulty  noted  by  Langen^®  should  be  con- 
sidered: that  although  at  vv.6i3f.  Myrrhina  is 
not  with  Cleostrata,  yet,  v.687,  she  has  been  with 
her  long  enough  to  plan  the  trick  of  Casina's 
madness  before  the  appearance  of  Pardalisca  at 
V.621.  The  time  is  scant,  for  there  is  no  pause 
before  v.621  which  follows  immediately  upon 

V.620    Quid  illuc  clamoris,  opsecro,  in  nostrast 
domo? 

Yet  there  are  parallels,  cf .  the  short  time  allowed 
for  the  girl  to  move  from  house  to  house  in  the 
Miles,  VV.395-411,  456-468. 

We  can  hardly  agree  with  Legrand^°  in  con- 
sidering the  plot  merely  a  juxtaposition  of  epi- 
sodes, too  much  lacking  in  coherence  to  make 
possible  a  separation  of  the  several  plays  which 
served  as  its  model.  Compared  with  the  ob- 
scurity of  the  Epidicus,  for  example,  the  Casina 
is  clear  and  unified.  The  Casina,  therefore,  the 
one  play  concerning  whose  revival  we  have  ex- 
plicit information,  cf.  Prolog,  vv.iiff.,  was  not 
so  altered  at  the  time  of  its  later  presentation  as 
to  become  obscure.  We  may  infer  that  retrac- 
tatio  did  not  always  produce  obscurities,  cf.  also 
Langen's  remark^^  that  the  Casina  contains  no 

29  Ibid. 

30  Daos,  p.387f. 

31  Plaut.  Stud,  p.31. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        85 

cases  of  redundancy  or  repetition  so  striking  that 
they  may  be  unPlautine.  Even  though  the 
Greek  model  contained  nothing  Uke  the  farce 
which  ends  the  play,  neither  its  treatment  nor  the 
combination  of  the  farcical  elements  with  the 
play  of  Diphilus  is  unPlautine. 

Curculio  In  the  Curculio,  Phaedromus,  a 
youth,  is  in  love  with  a  girl,  v.42ff.,  in  the  service 
of  a  leno,  who  wishes  to  force  her  into  the  life 
of  a  meretrix,  v.46,  from  which  Phaedromus 
wishes  to  free  her.  For  that  purpose  he  needs 
30  minae,  v. 63,  and  he  has  sent  his  parasite  to 
Caria  to  borrow  the  money  from  a  friend.  The 
parasite  who  gives  the  name  to  the  play  carries 
out  the  intrigue.  Relying  upon  his  assistance, 
Phaedromus  is  very  apprehensive  lest  he  return 
from  Caria  without  the  needed  money, 

vv.i43f.     .    .    .  nam    confido    parasitum   hodie 
aduenturum 
Cum  argento  ad  me. 

cf.  vv.225f.  The  need  and  the  effort  to  meet 
that  need  occurred  before  the  action  of  the  play 
opens,  vv.67f.  But  the  return  of  the  parasite 
with  the  means  at  hand,  w.274ff.,  335 f.,  dispels 
Phaedromus'  apprehension  and  he  falls  in  with 
Curculio's  plan  to  trick  the  trapezita, 

\v.26gi.     Tu  tabellas  consignato,  hie  ministrabit, 
ego  edam. 
Dicam  quem  ad  modum  conscribas. 


86         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

by  a  forged  letter  backed  by  the  guarantee  of  a 
ring  which  he  had  won  from  the  miles. 

All  the  details  necessary  for  the  execution  of 
the  trick  had  been  revealed  to  Curculio  by  the 
mUes, — a  letter  and  seal  to  be  honoured  by  the 
release  of  the  girl,  w.345ff.  Each  of  these  is 
used  in  the  subsequent  action,  vv.4iif.,  v.421, 
vv.432fF.,  as  well  as  in  the  contents  of  the  forged 
letter  which  Curculio  composed  to  help  out  the 
deception.  The  trick  is  successful,  Act  III  i, 
and  the  money  is  at  hand,  v.455,  for  the  virgo, 
who  is  ransomed  from  the  leno  on  the  condition 
that  the  ransom-money  be  refunded  if  she  be 
found  to  be  free-bom, 

vv.49off.     Memento  promisisse  te,  si  quisquam 

hanc  liberali 
Causa    manu    adsereret,    mihi    omne 

argentum  redditum  eiri, 
Minas  triginta.     Ca.      Meminero: 

The  trick  is  discovered,  Act  IV  3,  upon  the  ar- 
rival of  the  miles,  with  a  careful  repetition  of  the 
details  involved  in  the  transaction.  But  as  the 
girl  turns  out  to  be  the  miles'  sister,  the  leno  is 
held  to  his  promise,  v.717,  and  the  girl  is  be- 
trothed to  her  lover. 

The  exposition  of  the  play  is  perfectly  clear  in 
spite  of  the  shortening  which  has  befallen  it,  to 
which  Langen^^  attributed  the  discrepancies  be- 
tween the  various  passages  wherein  the  sum  of 
money  needed  to  ransom  the  girl  is  mentioned, 
vv.343fT.,  525fF.,  666,  682flF.    The  disregard  of 

82  Plaut.  stud,  p.136. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        87 

the  time  required  for  Curculio's  journey  to 
Caria  and  back,  v.206,  cannot  be  regarded  as 
serious  unless  the  identity  of  this  particular  Caria 
be  established.  Characteristic  of  Plautine 
technique  are  the  motiveless  appearance  of  the 
miles  immediately  after  Curculio's  return  and  the 
lack  of  motivation,  according  to  Legrand,^^  and 
the  psychological  improbability  of  the  miles'  dis- 
closure to  Curculio,  though  it  is  absolutely  neces- 
sary for  the  development  of  the  action.  In  de- 
fense we  might  say  that  it  is  not  improbable  that 
at  such  a  drinking  bout  the  soldier  should  become 
communicative  nor  that  he  should  go  after  the 
girl.  His  arrival  occurs,  of  course,  when  it  is 
needed. 

The  disappearance  of  Palinurus  from  the  play, 
which  Leo  notes,^*  is  due  to  the  appearance  of 
Curculio  and  the  transfer  of  the  action  to  his 
guidance.^^  He  is  more  active,  Leo  holds,  than 
the  usual  TCpoawwov  xpoTairtxov,  hence  his  dis- 
appearance needs  explanation,  though  it  in  no 
way  affects  the  course  of  the  deception. 

We  have  noted  above  that  Langen  attributed 
the  variations  in  the  money  transaction  to  retrac- 
tatio,  especially  the  unexplained  additional  ten 
minae,  vv.343,  525,  528.  An  examination  of  the 
other  comedies  in  which  such  transactions  play 
an  important  part,  the  Asinaria,  Bacchides,  Epi- 
dicus,  Persa,  and  Pseudolus,  may  prove  illumin- 
ating. 

33Dax)s,  p.404. 

34  Plaut.  Forsch.  p.l97,  n.l. 

35  Ibid,  p.243. 


88  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

In  the  Asinaria,  one  sum,  20  minae,  occurs 
throughout  the  play,  except  in  v.  193  where  the 
lena,  with  the  greed  characteristic  of  her  profes- 
sion, at  first  demands  the  exorbitant  sum  of  two 
talents,  sure  to  raise  a  laugh  because  of  its  exor- 
bitance. When  she  finally  becomes  serious  in 
V.229,  she  gives  the  actual  sum,  again  20  minae. 
The  constant  reiteration  of  the  sum  in  vv.633ff. 
adds  to  the  comic  effect  just  as  much  as  the  ex- 
aggeration of  the  sum  in  the  Persa,  v.743,^^ 
which  is  the  only  deviation  in  that  play  from  the 
600  nummi  mentioned  elsewhere,  v.36,  117,  437, 
852. 

In  the  Pseudolus,  though  it  is  perhaps  a  con- 
taminated play  (cf.  below)  the  sum  of  money 
needed  for  the  girl  remains  the  same  throughout, 
20  minae,  vv.52,  ii3f.,  117,  280,  344,  404,  412, 
484,  1068,  1070,  1077,  1223,  1228,  1241,  of  which 
the  miles  has  already  paid  fifteen  minae  and  still 
owes  five,  vv.54,  346,  619,  718,  732,  753,  11 49. 
Similarly  in  the  Bacchides,  200  golden  Philippi  is 
the  price  set  for  Bacchis'  ransom,  vv.590,  706, 
709,  868,  873,  879,  882,  919,  969,  997,  loio,  1026, 
1033,  1050. 

In  the  Epidicus  various  sums  occur,^'^  40  minae 
in  vv.52,  114,  122,  141,  296,  646;  50  minae  in 
VV.347,  366,  467,  though  in  the  first  instance  the 
explanation  is  given  that  the  sum  is  ten  manae 
more  than  the  danista  demands ;  and  in  v.468,  60 
minae,  the  old  man  is  evidently  trying  to  strike 
as  good  a  bargain  as  possible  with  the  miles. 

36  Langen,:  Plaut.  Stud.  p.l78. 

37  Ibid,  p.139. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        89 

Plautus,  to  be  sure,  interchanges  terms  for 
money  at  will  f^  and  his  nummus,  though  regular- 
ly referring  to  the  didrachma,  sometimes  has  a 
value  of  one  or  four  drachmae,  while  nummus  or 
Philip  pus  aureus  regularly  equals  one- fifth  of  a 
mina.  Since  in  general,  therefore,  the  play- 
wright is  consistent  in  the  number,  at  least,  we 
may  conclude  that  those  variations  which  occur, 
as  here  for  example,  are  probably  due  to  some  re- 
worker  of  the  play. 

Epidicus  In  the  Epidicus,  Stratippocles,  a 
youth,  off  to  the  wars,  had  given  a  commission 
to  his  slave  Epidicus  to  secure  for  him  a  fidi- 
cina,  vv.46ff.,  with  whom  he  had  become  en- 
amoured. This  Epidicus  had  accomplished;  but 
the  youth,  during  his  campaign  having  trans- 
ferred his  affection  to  a  captive  Theban  girl  and 
borrowed  money  from  a  danista,  v.  1 1 5,  to  ransom 
her,  appeals  to  Epidicus  upon  his  return  to  help 
him  get  the  money  to  repay  the  loan  and  inci- 
dentally to  get  rid  of  the  former  object  of  his 
fancy,  fidicina,  No.  i, 

vv.i5if.     St.    Quid  ilia  fiet  fidicina  igitur?    Ep. 
Aliqua  res  reperibitur  ; 
Aliqua  ope  exsoluam,  extricabor  ali- 
qua. 

Both  of  these  things  Epidicus  agrees  to  do, 
first  by  working  on  Periphanes'   (the  father  of 

38  Brlx:  Trlnununus,  ed.  note  on  v.844;  Gray:  Epidicus, 
ed.  note  on  v.54. 


90         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Stratippocles)  suspicions  of  his  son's  entangle- 
ment with  a  fidicinc, 

V.191     Nam  ego  ilium  audiui  in  amorem  haerere 
apud  nescioquam  fidicinam; 

to  the  extent  of  persuading  him  to  furnish  the 
money  to  buy  her  and  send  her  out  of  the  coun- 
try, 

V.193     Ipsi  hi  quidem  mihi  dant  uiam,  quo  pacto 
ab  se  argentum  auferam 

and  by  disposing  of  fidicina  No.  i,  whom  we  had, 
before  the  play  opens,  persuaded  the  old  man  to 
ransom  from  her  owner  as  his  long-lost  daughter, 
to  a  miles  who  is  interested  in  her, 

vv.i53fif.     .    .    .    Est  Euboicus  miles,  locuples, 

multo  auro  potens. 
Qui  ubi  tibi  istam  emptam  esse  scibit 

atque  banc  adductam  alteram, 
Continuo    te    orabit    ultro,    ut    illam 

tramittas  sibi. 

The  money  which  is  to  be  obtained  presumably 
to  buy  the  fidicina  No.  2,  is  intended  really  for 
the  danista's  claims  against  Stratippocles  for  the 
money  which  he  had  loaned  him  to  pay  for  the 
captive  girl. 

Inasmuch  as  Periphanes  cannot  in  person  ar- 
range the  transaction  with  the  leno  for  the  fidi- 
cina, Epidicus  enlists  the  help  of  Periphanes' 
friend  Apoecides, 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        91 

V.287     Opus  est  homine,  qui  illo  argen- 
tum  deferat  pro  fidicina; 

cf .     vv.357ff Nunc  auctorem 

Dedit  mihi  ad  hanc  rem  Apoeci- 
dem — is  apud  forum  manet  me. 

And  as  the  fidicina  No.  2  is  really  only  a  figment 
of  Epidicus'  crafty,  scheming  brain,  he  must  get 
some  fidicina  to  help  him  carry  out  his  pretense. 
To  that  end  he  plans  to  engage  the  assistance  of 
a  cithern-player  whom  Periphanes  had  directed 
him  to  hire  for  a  ceremony  on  that  day,  cf. 
vv.3i4f.  To  facilitate  his  plans  he  decides  even 
to  give  a  message  with  double  meaning  to  the 
leno, 

vv.364ff.     Deueniam  ad  lenonem  domum  egomet 
solus,  eum  docebo, 
Siqui  ad  eum  adueniant,  ut  sibi  esse 

datum  argentum  dicat. 
Pro  fidicina  argenti  minas  se  habere 
quinquaginta 

who  may  testify  apparently  to  the  genuineness  of 
the  purchase,  but  who  will  do  so  to  his  own  un- 
doing, 

V.369     Ibi  leno  sceleratum  caput  suom  inprudens 
alligabit. 

So  much  for  the  plans  and  ruses  laid  by  the 
trickster.  The  accomplishment  of  them  is  a  dif- 
ferent matter.  Epidicus  gets  the  needed  money 
from  the  old  man,  v.319,  and  hands  it  over  to  his 
young  master, 


92  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

V.347    Decern  minis  plus  attuli,  quam  tu  danistae 
debes. 

With  Apoecides  as  a  witness  he  also  purchases 
the  fidicina  No.  2,  at  least  to  all  appearances, 
though  he  has  only  hired  her,  Act  III  3, 

vv.4iiff ut  ille  fidi- 

cinam 
Fecit  nescire  esse  emptam  tibi : 
Ita  ridibundam  atque  hilarum  hue  ad- 

duxit  simul. 

In  Act  III  4  the  opportune  appearance  of  the 
miles  seems  to  Periphanes  to  be  solving  his  prob- 
lem of  getting  rid  of  fidicina  No.  2;  but  in  the 
confusion  which  results  from  the  miles'  failure 
to  recognize  her  as  the  fidicina  of  his  fancy,  she 
reveals  the  true  state  of  affairs,  either  under 
pressure  of  circumstances  in  the  absence  of  her 
employer  Epidicus,  who  might  have  kept  her 
keyed  up  to  the  role  which  he  had  planned  to  dic- 
tate to  her,  or  through  an  intentional  volte- face 
in  her  role  on  the  part  of  the  playwright,  for 
comic  effect,  or  through  her  belief  that  she  had 
really  been  only  hired.^^  Upon  this  revelation 
she  is  dismissed  with  little  ceremony  by  Peri- 
phanes, V.515,  and  disappears  from  the  play  like 
the  parasite  and  his  daughter  in  the  Persa. 

The  appearance  of  fidicina  No.  i.  Act  IV  2, 
reveals  the  old  man's  predicament  still  further, 

39  A.  L.  Wheeler:  The  Plot  of  the  Epidicus,  A.  J.  P. 
Vol,  XXXVin  3  (1917)  pp.  236-264. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        93 

when  he  reaUzes,  through  the  evidence  of  Philip- 
pa,  that  Epidicus  has  led  him  to  believe  her  his 
daughter,  when  such  is  not  the  case, 

vv.S97f.     Quibus    de    signis    agnoscebas?     Pe. 
Nullis.     Phi.   Qua  re  filiam 
Credidisti  nostram?    Pe.  Seruos  Epidi- 
cus dixit  mihi. 

When  the  real  daughter  actually  appears  in  the 
person  of  Telestis,  the  Theban  captive,  the  recog- 
nition between  her  and  Epidicus  leads  to  a  final 
clearing-up  and  explanation,  vv.696ff.  The  fate 
of  the  fidicina  No.  i  is  left  undetermined,  unless 
it  is  hinted  at  in 

V.653     Tibi  quidem  quod  ames  domi  praestost — 
fidicina — opera  mea: 

And  Epidicus'  plan  to  dupe  the  leno,  mentioned 
above,  is  not  carried  out. 

Apart  from  this  last  point,  the  other  contradic- 
tions noted  by  Langen*"  do  not  affect  the  course 
of  the  trickery.  Such  details  as  contradictions 
in  the  price  demanded  for  the  Theban  captive 
(Plautus  is  often  inconsistent  in  arithmetic,  cf. 
discussion  above  in  the  Curculio")  or  in  Rhodian 
versus  Euboean  for  the  nationality  of  the  miles, 
or  in  portam  versus  portum  in  the  manuscript 
reading  of  v.  14,*^  are  easily  overlooked  in  a  plot 

40  Plaut.  Stud.  pp.l37fE. 

41  A.  L.  Wheeler:  Epidicus,  A.  J.  P.  op.  cit. 

42  Langen:  op.  cit.  p.l38. 


94  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

so  complicated  as  this.*^  Such  neglect  may  in 
part  be  attributed  to  the  playwright  himself. 

Whether  the  loose  and  dropped  threads  noted 
above  can  also  be  attributed  to  him  is  another 
matter.  Ladewig  assumed  contaminatio**  to  ex- 
plain the  complicated  plot.  Reinhardt*^  blamed 
retractatores  for  it.  Ussing*^  contests  both,  ex- 
plaining the  shortness  of  the  play  in  comparison 
with  the  Bacchides,  for  example,  by  lacunae.  To 
be  sure,  the  Epidicus  lacks  to  a  great  extent  those 
long  drawn  out  dialogues,  unessential  to  the  plot 
and  introduced  generally  for  comic  effect,  or  as 
time  fillers,  which  the  others  contain.  Take  for 
example  the  Persa  and  the  Pseudolus.  If  we 
should  strip  them  of  passages  generally  agreed  to 
be  unnecessary,  the  difference  in  length  between 
the  plays  would  not  be  so  great.  The  Persa 
minus  Act  II  2  and  II  4  and  all  of  Act  V, — 
857VV.-176VV., — leaves  681  verses.  The  Pseu- 
dolus minus  Act  I  2,  III  2,  II  2  and  most  of  V  2, 
— 1335VV.-256VV., — leaves  1078  verses  in  con- 
trast to  the  780  verses  of  the  Epidicus ;  and  the 
result  is  striking.  To  be  sure,  in  the  case  of  the 
Persa  and  the  Pseudolus  there  is  not  the  same  de- 
gree of  obscurity  which  is  present  in  the  Epidi- 
cus. 

Leo  suggested*^  that  all  the  difficulties  were 
probably  cleared  up  in  a  prologue  which  is  now 

43  Usslng;  Commentarius,  p.245. 

44  Gray:  Ed.  Introd.  p.XXX. 

45  Studemund's  Studlen  I  103. 

46  Op  clt. 

4T  Plaut.  Forsch.  p.l99. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        95 

missing.  The  change  also  in  the  conclusion  of 
the  play  from  that  of  the  Greek  original,  to  suit 
the  Roman  taste  and  point  of  view,**  caused 
some  ambiguity,*^  inasmuch  as  Plautus  apparent- 
ly did  not  attempt  to  adjust  the  preceding  action 
to  the  changed  conclusion.  Dziatzko  considered 
that  this  play  was  a  good  illustration  of  the  in- 
dependence which  Plautus  might  exercise  if  he 
chose,  and  hence  his  fondness  for  the  play,  of. 
Bacchides  vv.2i4f.,  may  have  rested  upon  his 
consciousness  of  that  independence. 

RitschP"  considered  the  carrying  out  of  the  in- 
trigue in  the  Epidicus  spirited  and  clever;  but, 
as  he  himself  admitted,  in  contrast  with  the  Pseu- 
dolus  and  the  Mostellaria  we  miss  that  keen  en- 
joyment of  the  trickery  in  and  for  itself,  a  lack 
which  is  partly  due  to  the  obscurity  already  men- 
tioned. But  not  all  the  obscurity  can  be  attri- 
buted to  the  poet's  treatment  of  an  unusual  Greek 
original  nor  to  the  loss  of  a  prologue  or  exposi- 
tory passage  early  in  the  play.  Some  of  it  must 
be  due  surely  to  later  cutting,  and  the  play  can- 
not be  declared  Plautine  in  its  present  form,^^ 

Menaechmi 

Inasmuch  as  the  confusion  aris- 
ing from  the  mistaken  identity  of  the  brothers 
Menaechmi  is  the  result  of  unconscious  rather 


4S  Dziatzko:  Der  Inhalt  des  Georgos  von  Menander,  Rh. 
M.  55,   (1900)  pp.l041f. 

49  Leo:    R6m.   Lit.   p.l33. 

50  Opusc.  n  pp.746f. 

51  A.  L.  Wheeler:  Spidlcus,  op.  eit. 


96         DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

than  intentional  deception,  an  analysis  of  the  plot 
need  not  be  introduced  here.  The  fact  of  de- 
ception as  the  chief  interest  in  the  play  brings  it 
necessarily  within  the  first  class  of  plays  as  we 
have  divided  them.  But  the  deception  is  a  static 
rather  than  an  active  one. 

Since  the  unity  of  the  play  cannot  be  main- 
tained by  a  close  inter-relation  of  plan  and  action, 
as  is  the  case  in  the  other  plays,  the  playwright's 
methods  of  attaining  such  unity  should  be  noted, 
inasmuch  as  in  the  processes  of  unconscious  de- 
ception those  methods  are  equivalent  to  the  de- 
finitely worked  out  plans  in  the  other  plays.  With 
the  first  appearance  of  Menaechmus  I  are  intro- 
duced the  details  about  which  centre  the  subse- 
quent confusion, — the  meddlesome  wife, 
vv.i22flF.,  i6i ;  the  meretrix,  vv.124,  130,  173;  the 
wife's  palla  stolen  as  a  gift  for  the  arnica,  vv.130, 
166;  the  ubiquitous  parasite.  With  Menaechmus' 
presentation  of  his  wife's  palla  to  the  meretrix, 
v.202,  in  the  parasite's  presence,  all  these  details 
are  again  united. 

The  entrance  of  Menaechmus  II  with  his  an- 
nouncement of  his  search  for  his  twin-brother, 
V.233,  and  his  slave's  warning  to  beware  of  the 
temptations  of  the  city,  vv.268fT.,  followed  by  his 
immediate  meeting  with  the  meretrix's  cook  who 
mistakes  him  for  Menaechmus  I,  sets  the  stage 
for  the  play.  Again  parasite,  v.281,  and  mere- 
trix, V.300,  combine ;  and  with  the  appearance  of 
Erotium,  the  meretrix  herself,  and  her  salutation 
of  Menaechmus  II  as  Menaechmus  I,  all  these 
details  are  reunited,  especially  in 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION       97 

vv.42off.     .  .   .  hunc  metuebam,  ni  meae 

Vxori    renuntiaret    de    palla    et    de 

prandio. 
Nunc  quando  uis,  eamus  intro.      Er. 

Etiam  parasitum  manes? 

when  Menaechmus  finally  yields  to  circum- 
stances. 

When  the  parasite  meets  Menaechmus  II  car- 
rying the  palla,  v.469,  and  mistakes  him  for 
Menaechmus  I,  the  soliloquy  of  Menaechmus  II, 
vv.474ff.,  gives  the  clue  to  the  audience  for  an- 
other scene  of  misunderstanding,  in  which  the 
same  details  are  reiterated  and  the  palla  serves 
as  incriminating  evidence,  vv.505ff.  This  evi- 
dence the  parasite  uses  when  he  reports  to 
Menaechmus  Fs  wife  her  husband's  misde- 
meanours, Act  IV  I. 

As  to  what  Menaechmus  I  may  have  been  do- 
ing during  the  time  required  for  the  interven- 
ing action,  the  playwright  is  careful  to  explain  in 
Menaechmus'  own  words,  vv.588ff.,  with  clear 
emphasis  upon  the  essential  connecting-links, 
arnica,  v.sgSffi  palla,  v.609;  uxor,  v.6oi.  So  also 
through  the  scene  between  the  matrona  and  her 
father  and  Menaechmus  II,  Act  IV  i,  especially 

w.4o6f.   .    .    .   etiam  nunc  habet  pallam,  pater, 
.  .  .  quod  ad  hanc  detulerat : 

and  again  in  Act  V  8,  between  Menaechmus  I 
and  the  senex,  the  same  thread  runs, 


98  DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

vv.i048f.     Nunc  ibo  intro  ad  hanc  meretricem, 
quamquam  suscenset  mihi, 
Sei  possum  exorare,  ut  pallam  red- 
dat,  quam  referam  domum. 

In  the  final  recognition-scene,  Act  V  9,  the  same 
details  recur, — pallam,  vv.io6i,  1138;  meretrix, 
W.I  135;  though  the  parasite  is  supplanted  by  the 
servus  Messenio. 

Chance  in  a  freakish  whim'^  controls  the  af- 
fairs of  the  characters  of  the  drama.  The  chief 
inconsistency  is  the  lack  of  sagacity  on  the  part 
of  the  two  brothers  all  through  the  play  but  es- 
pecially when  they  finally  meet.^^  The  chief  de- 
fect is  the  long,  tiresome  anagnorisis^*  which 
fails  even  of  being  very  amusing.  The  play  is 
full  of  improbabilities,  but  there  are  no  obscuri- 
ties of  sufficient  importance  to  spoil  the  fun. 

Mercator 

The  Mercator  presents  the  same 
theme  as  the  Casina,  rivalry  in  love  between  a 
father  and  son,  resulting  in  the  triumph  of  the 
youth  and  the  discomfiture  of  the  old  man.  The 
youth  Charinus  speaks  the  prologue  and  gives  the 
facts  necessary  for  a  comprehension  of  the  play : 
he  had  been  sent  by  his  father,  Demipho,  to 
Rhodes  on  business,  v.ii,  where  he  had  fallen 
in  love;  he  had  bought  the  object  of  his  fancy, 
V.106,  and  brought  her  back  with  him  to  Athens, 
but  not  wishing  his  father  to  see  her  had  left  her 

52  Legrand:  Daos,  p.395. 

63  Ibid,  p.405. 

64  Langen:  Plaut.  Stud.  p.l57. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION        99 

on  board  the  ship  with  a  slave.  His  efforts  are 
in  vain,  however,  v.  181,  and  the  resulting  com- 
plications, that  is  the  trickery,  consist  merely  in 
the  efforts  of  the  old  man  to  gain  possession  of 
the  girl  by  pretending  to  buy  her  for  a  friend 
and  the  counter-pretense  on  the  part  of  Charinus, 
first  that  he  has  bought  her  as  an  ancilla  for  his 
mother  and  later  his  desire  to  buy  her  for  a 
friend. 

Throughout  the  play  there  is  little  planning 
and  the  whole  thread  of  the  plot  is  traced  by  the 
playwright  in  allegorical  language  in  Demipho's 
dream,  Act  II  i, 

vv.252ff.     Hoc  quam  ad  rem  credam  pertinere 

somnium 
Nequeo   inuenire:   nisi   capram  illam 

suspicor 
lam  me  inuenisse  quae  sit  aut  quid 

uoluerit. 

In  the  absence  of  the  usual  careful  planning  of 
the  deception,  such  as  has  been  found  in  the  other 
plays,  this  dream  serves  as  preparation  for  the 
subsequent  action,^^ 

The  first  encounter  of  the  rivals  occurs  in  Act 
II  3,  where  each  does  his  best  to  outwit  the  other. 
Demipho  apparently  gets  the  upper  hand  and 
hurries  off  to  the  ship  where  Charinus  is  keeping 
the  girl,  though  he  takes  the  precaution  of  trying 
to  avoid  detection, 

55  Leo:  Plaut.  Forsch.  pp.l62ff.  cf.  also  the  dream  In 
the  Rudens. 


lOO        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

vv.466ff.     Ibo  ad  portum,  ne  hie  resciscat,  cauto 
opust,  non  ipse  emam, 
Sed  Lysimacho  amico  mandabo:  is  se 

ad  portum  deixerat 
Ire  dudum. 

The  old  man's  eagerness  is  offset  by  Charinus' 
counter-trick,  vv.485ff.,  to  have  his  friend  Euty- 
chus  buy  the  girl  for  him,  though  whence  the 
money  shall  be  obtained  is  not  known, 

vv.492f .     Sed  quid  ais  ?  unde  erit  argentum  quod 
des,  quom  poscet  pater? 
Cha.      Inuenietur,    exquiretur,  aliquid 
fiet. 

Demipho's  agent,  Lysimachus,  anticipates  Euty- 
chus,  however,  and  carries  off  Pasicompsa  whom 
he  plans  to  lodge  safely  in  his  own  house,  with- 
out the  knowledge  of  his  friend's  wife  or  his 
son.  Charinus  is  apparently  defeated,  vv.593fT., 
V.616,  and  decides  to  run  away,  when  he  hears 
of  his  failure.  His  friend,  Eutychus,  however, 
finds  the  girl  in  his  own  father's  house,  where 
her  presence  has  caused  a  serious  misunderstand- 
ing between  his  parents,  since  loyalty  to  his 
friend  Demipho  prevents  Lysimachus'  explana- 
tion of  Pasicompsa's  presence  in  his  house.  A 
final  clearing-up  of  the  situation  follows. 

As  is  evident  from  a  comparison  of  this  plot 
with  that  of  the  other  plays,  the  trickery  is  not 
nearly  so  complicated  nor  so  definitely  planned 
and  carried  out.    But  the  plot  is  simple  and  uni- 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      loi 

fied.  The  psychological  improbabilities  in  the 
play^*  arise  as  in  the  other  plays  from  the  sacri- 
fice of  probability  for  the  sake  of  comic  effect. 
In  Act  II  3  where  neither  father  nor  son  seems 
to  suspect  the  ultimate  purpose  of  the  other,  the 
ridiculousness  of  the  situation  adds  greatly  to  the 
amusement.  Also  the  details  as  to  the  purchase 
of  Pasicompsa  are  not  clear,  but  enough  is  given 
for  the  audience  to  understand  that  she  has  come 
into  Demipho's  power.  (This  is  a  case  in  which 
the  details  of  what  occurs  off  the  stage  are  not 
clear.)  There  are  no  contradictions.  There  is 
much  discussion  about  vv.529ff.,  where  Lysi- 
machus  tells  the  girl,  Tuo  ero  redempta's  rursum. 
but  Lysimachus  is  poking  fun  all  through  this 
scene,  so  such  discussion  need  not  be  taken 
seriously. 

Miles  Gloriosus 

The  Miles  is  a  good  illustra- 
tion of  the  way  in  which  Plautus  carefully  p  e- 
pares  for  trickery  in  his  plays  and  keeps  before 
his  audience  the  fact  that  deception  is  being  prac- 
tised upon  the  various  victims  involved.  The 
preparation  for  all  the  subsequent  trickery^^  is 
the  agreement  made  by  a  glance,  v.  123,  between 
Philocomasium  and  Palaestrio,  the  trickster,  to 
keep  their  former  acquaintance  a  secret.  The 
entire  development  of  the  action  rests  practical- 
ly upon  this  agreement,  which  is  kept  up  through- 

56  Langen:   Plaut.   Stud.   pp.l58ff. 

57Brix:  Miles  Gloriosus,  ed.  Introd.  p.41,  note. 


I02        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

out  the  play,  since  even  at  the  end  when  Palaestrio 
is  sent  by  the  miles  to  follow  Philocomasium, 
vv.i372ff.,  the  miles  apparently  does  not  know  of 
their  acquaintance. 

The  action  of  the  Miles  includes  three  ruses, 
the  first  of  which  is  being  used  when  the  play 
opens,  i.  e.  the  secret  passage  between  the  houses 
of  the  miles  and  Periplecomenus,  to  admit  of  in- 
tercourse between  the  youth  Pleusicles  and  Philo- 
comasium who  is  detained  under  the  guard  of 
the  soldier's  servus  Sceledrus, 

vv.i42f.     In  eo  conclaui  ego  perfodi  parietem. 
Qua  commeatus  clam  esset   hinc    hue 
mulieri. 

By  this  means  and  by  the  pretense  that  a  twin- 
sister  of  Philocomasium's  is  staying  in  Peripleco- 
menus' house,  i.  e.  the  second  trick,  vv.i5off.,  cf. 

vv.237ff.     Nunc  sic  rationem  incipisso,  banc  in- 

stituam  astutiam: 
Ut   Philocomasio  hue  sororem  gemi- 

nam  germanam  alteram 
Dicam  Athenis   aduenisse   cum   ama- 

tore  aliquo  suo 
Tam  similem  quam  lacte  lactist: 

helped  along  by  the  pretended  dream,  narrated 
by  the  mulier,  vv.383ff.,  Sceledrus  is  completely 
fooled,  as  he  is  forced  to  admit,  vv.538f.,  cf. 
V.556.    Philocomasium's  personation  as  she  plays 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      103 

the  role  of  the  twin-sister  in  Act  II  5  is  especial- 
ly convincing. 

The  audience  is  carefully  informed  of  the  chief 
means  whereby  the  plot  is  to  be  carried  out,  i.  e. 
by  the  secret  passage.  An  extremely  naive 
"stage  direction"  for  the  audience  is  given  in 

vv.522ff Heus,  Philocomasium,  cito 

Transcurre  curriculo  ad  nos :  ita  nego- 

tiumst. 
Post,  quando  exierit  Sceledrus  a  no- 
bis, cito 
Transcurrito  ad  110s  rursum  curriculo 
domum. 

But  Sceledrus  is  unaware  of  it,  vv.i45ff.,  vv.329, 
376.  Indications  of  its  use,  besides  the  quick 
passing  of  Philocomasium  from  one  house  to  the 
other,  VV.182,  41  iff.,  occur  throughout  the  play. 
The  preparation  for  the  twin-sister  trick, 
vv.i5off.,  indicates  its  use,  v.151  hinc  et  illinc,  as 
do  Palaestrio's  orders  quoted  above,  cf.  vv.182, 
473 f.  Sceledrus'  reiteration  that  as  far  as  his 
knowledge  goes  no  connection  exists  between  the 
two  houses,  vv.329,  376,  418,  merely  adds  to  the 
comic  effect  and  increases  the  appearance  of  his 
delusion.  It  is  evident,  too,  that  clearness  was 
gained  by  gesture,  especially  where  both  houses 
were  indicated,  or  where  a  contrast  between  the 
two  was  intimated,  v.  143  hinc  hue;  v.  154  hinc 
a  vicino  sene;  v.151  hinc  et  illinc;  vv.323f.  domi 
.  .  domi  .  .  domi,  which  was  surely  emphasized 
by  pointing;  v.361  ad  laevam;  v.376  domo  con- 


I04        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

trasted  with  v.377  hinc  hue  and  v.379  hie  intus  ; 
v,42i  quid  tibi  istie  in  istisee  aedibus;  cf.  also 
vv.iSif.  hicine  .  .  hie;  hue;  v.264  hie  in  proxu- 
mo ;  V.273  hie  proxumae  uieiniae ;  v.301  intus  hie 
in  proxumo ;  v.329  hine  hue  transire ;  v.338  hie 
intus;  v.341  exire  hine.  v.455  isto  me  intro 
must  surely  have  been  indieated  by  a  gesture  and 
the  action  in  the  following  line,  v.456,  must  have 
been  opposite  to  the  gesture,  to  aeeount  for 
Seeledrus'  amazement  at  Philoeomasium's  per- 
fidy, sinee  she  flees  into  Peripleeomenus'  house. 

As  has  been  also  noted,  the  first  real  triek  of 
the  play,  the  twin-sister  trick,  is  also  carefully 
prepared,  vv.237fT.,  i.  e.  Palaestrio  instructs 
Peripleeomenus  how  to  coach  Philocomasium. 
The  coaching  is  done  off  the  stage,  but  vv.354ff. 
condense  it  all  over  again  as  the  girl  appears  to 
play  her  part.  Provision  is  even  made,  vv.25off., 
for  possible  incredulity  on  the  part  of  the  object 
of  the  deception  and  the  possible  need  of  evading 
proof  as  to  the  existence  of  the  soror  gemina 
germana. 

Not  content  with  the  success  of  his  plot  when 
directed  against  the  slave  in  these  two  tricks, 
Palaestrio  directs  his  forces  against  the  master, 
the  miles  himself, 

\\.y6yi.     .    .    .   nam  ego  inueni  lepidam  syco- 
phantiam, 
Qui  admutiletur  miles  usque  caesaria- 
tus,  .... 

The  plans  have  been  carefully  laid  by  the  trick- 
ster, vv.6i2f.,  but  are  repeated, 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      105 

vv.9o6ff.    Ac.     Nempe  ludificari   militem  tuom 

erum  uis  ?     Pa.  Exlocuta's. 
Ac.    Lepide  et  sapienter,  commode  et 

facete  res  paratast. 
Pa.     Atque  huius  uxorem  f  tu  uolo 

adsimulari.     Ac.  Fiet. 
Pa.     Quasi   militi   animum   adieceris 

simulare.     Ac.  Sic  futurumst. 

for  the  benefit  of  the  audience, — a  plan  to  en- 
snare the  affections  of  the  miles  by  the  charms 
of  a  new  mistress,  Acroteleutium,  and  thus  to 
induce  him  to  release  Philocomasium,  Act  IV  3. 
The  plan  also  involves  the  bait  of  Peripleco- 
menus'  house  as  a  pretended  dowry  to  the  pre- 
tended wife,  vv.ii65ff.,  and  the  personation  by 
Pleusicles  of  the  nauclerus, 

vv.  1 17611.     Quom  extemplo  hoc  erit  factum,  ubi 
intro  haec  abierit,  ibi  tu  ilico 
Facito  uti  uenias  ornatu  hue  ad  nos 
nauclerico, 

come  to  escort  Philocomasium  to  the  ship. 

In  all  the  tricks  all  the  details  are  carefully 
outlined.^*  This  is  especially  true  of  this  main 
trick  of  the  second  part  of  the  play,  inasmuch  as 
the  trickster,  Palaestrio,  first  carefully  explains 
his  plan,  vv.77off . ;  then  the  meretrix  engaged  by 

58  Legrand :  Daos,  p.547 — commenting  on  the  pains 
often  undramatic,  taken  to  make  things  clear,  says:  "II 
a  voulu  surtout  6tre  comprls, — compris  de  la  masse,  des 
dffUVeTOe  dxpoaxat    commes  des  auditeure  intelligents." 


io6        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Periplecomenus  for  the  purpose  is  instructed  by 
the  latter  in  her  part,  vv.874ff.,  which  involves  a 
repetition  of  Palaestrio's  plan,  even  to  the  part  of 
the  ancilla  and  the  anulus  in  the  deception. 

v.796    Vt  simulet  se  tuam  esse  uxorem  et 
deperire  hunc  militem : 

cf.     v.goSi.     Atque  huius  uxorem  f  to  uolo  ad- 
simulari.     Fiet 
Quasi     militi     animum     adieceris 
simulare. 

vv.797f.     Quasique  hunc  anulum  faueae  suae 
dederit  eo  parro  mihi, 
Militi  ut  darem:  quasique  ego  rei 
sim  interpres 

cf.    V.910     Quasique  ea  res  per  me  interpre- 
tem  et  tuam  ancillam  eieceretur, 

V.912     Quasique    anulum    hunc    ancillula 
tua  abs  te  detulerit  ad  me. 

Also  it  might  be  noted  that  the  fact  of  the  whole 
plan  being  a  trick  is  again  kept  constantly  before 
the  audience,  vv.938,  943, 

hodie  hunc  dolum  dolamus 

cf.    Haud  uereor  ne  nos  subdola  perfidia  peruin- 
camur. 

Note  too  how  Milphidippa  announces  her  part  in 
an  aside  to  the  audience, 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      107 

vv.99if.     lamst  ante  aedis  circus  ubi  sunt  ludi 
faciundi  mihi. 
Dissimulabo    hos    quasi    non    uideam 
neque  esse  hie  etiamdum  sciam. 

The  additional  plan  of  Pleusicles'  personation  of 
the  nauclerus  is  likewise  clearly  outlined, 
vv.ii75ff. 

The  execution  of  the  tricks  is  no  less  definite 
than  are  the  preparations  and  anticipation  of 
them,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  Act  II  6  marks 
quite  definitely  the  conclusion  of  one  trick,  with 
the  consequent  dropping  of  the  play  which  served 
as  the  model  for  that  trick,  and  the  assumption 
of  a  new  plan  from  another  original.  The  de- 
tails of  the  twin-sister  trick  are  carried  out,  as 
we  have  said,  just  as  planned,  vv.439flF,,  and  the 
assumption  upon  which  that  trick  is  based,  of  the 
existence  of  a  soror  gemina  germana  is  further 
confirmed  by  the  testimony  of  Periplecomenus, 
vv.488fr. 

So  with  the  execution  of  the  trickery  of  the 
second  part  of  the  play  in  Acts  III  and  IV.  All 
the  plans  for  the  trick  are  carried  out,  connecting 
them  with  the  first  part  of  the  play  by 

V.975    Eius  hue  gemina  uenit  Ephesum  et  mater 
accersuntque  earn 

mentioning  the  twin-sister,  and 

v.  1089    Philocomasio  die,  sist  istic,  domum  ut 
transeat : 


io8        DECEPTION   IN   PLAUTUS 

implying  the  use  of  the  secret  passage.  The 
miles  is  caught  by  the  trick,  v.  1070,  and  Palaes- 
trio  is  joyful  over  his  success,  v.1091;  and  with 
V.I  135  Acroteleutium's  share  in  the  deception  be- 
gins actively  and  is  carried  out  as  planned. 

vv.i099ff.     Aurum  atque  uestem  muliebrem  om- 

nem  habeat  sibi. 
Quae  illi  instruxisti :  sumat,  habeat, 

auf erat : 
Dicasque  tempus  maxume  esse  ut  eat 

domum : 
Sororem  geminam  adesse  et  matrem 

dicito, 
Quibus     concomita     recte    deueniat 

domum. 

The  miles  falls  in  with  the  plot  to  get  rid  of  the 
girl,  cf. 

w.ii45ff.     Nam    ipse    miles    concubinam    intro 

abiit  oratum  suam, 
Ab  se  ut  abeat  cum  sorore  et  matre 

Athenas.     PI.    Eu,  probe. 
Pa.     Quin  etiam  aurum  atque  oma- 

menta  quae  ipse  intruxit  mulieri 
Omnia  dat  dono,  a  se  ut  abeat:  ita 

ego  consilium  dedi 

and  his  own  ruin  is  imminent,  vv.ii5off.,  which 
the  end  of  the  play  brings  as  a  reality,  in  the  pre- 
tended anger  of  the  pretended  husband,  to  the 
undoing  of  the  miles,  vv.1420,  i433ff.      In  Act 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      109 

IV  7  Pleusicles  plays  the  role  of  the  pseudo-nau- 
clerus  as  directed  and  carries  off  Philocomasium. 

In  other  words,  clearness  and  definiteness  in 
the  tricks  themselves  are  not  sacrificed  nor  af- 
fected by  the  combination  of  several  tricks.  It 
is  merely  the  lack  of  motive  for  the  twin-sister 
trick,  since  its  carefully  executed  plans  go  for 
nothing,  that  justifies  here  an  assumption  of  con- 
taminatio  in  the  composition  of  the  play.'"  The 
connecting-links  between  the  two  parts,  as  for 
example  the  way  in  which  the  twin-sister  trick 
and  the  secret  passage  are  dragged  into  the 
second  part  of  the  play,  are  not  skilfully  enough 
welded  together  to  conceal  the  joining  and  to  ef- 
fect unity  in  the  play.  No  ambiguity,  however, 
results  from  this  passing  from  one  deception  to 
the  other;  and  the  motive  for  it  seems  to  have 
been  the  playwright's  desire®"  to  include  in  the 
play  as  much  of  the  comic  element  as  possible,  ^ 
i.  e.  as  much  trickery  as  possible,  since  the  plan- 
ning and  execution  of  trickery  afford  the  chief 
comic  element  in  the  plays  of  Plautus. 

That  fact  also,  as  we  have  assumed  before, 
probably  causes  the  disregard  of  time,  noted  here 
in  the  three-years'  stay,  v.350,  compared  with  the 
short  time  required  for  the  incidents  mentioned 
in  w.121-124,*^  or  the  disregard  of  versimilitude 
in  Periplecomenus'  orders  shouted  to  his  slaves 

89  Leo:  Plaut.  Forsch,  p.l80;  J.  Mesk  in  Wiener  Studien, 
1913,  Part  11;   Lorenz:  Ed    Introd.  p.32, 

60  Brlx-Niemeyer:   Ed.  Introd.  p.l4. 

61  Langen:  Plaut.  Stud.  p.  167;  Brix:  op.  clt.,  note  on 
v.350. 


no        DECEPTION   IN   PLAUTUS 

from  the  street;  or  the  contradiction  between 
Sceledrus'  appearance  in  v.8i6  and  his  determin- 
ation in  V.586  to  run  away.  In  fact  we  would 
agree  with  Lorenz®^  that  it  is  in  cases  like  these 
that  Plautus  shows  his  carelessness  towards  the 
requirements  of  dramatic  action,  as  we  consider 
them,  and  his  disregard  of  minor  and  unessential 
details. 

Mostellaria 

The  deception  in  the  Mostellaria 
which  springs  entirely  from  sudden  inspiration 
under  stress  of  circumstances,  but  in  no  incom- 
prehensible nor  improbable  manner,^^  passes 
from  one  step  to  the  next,  from  one  lie  to  an- 
other, as  the  trickster  becomes  more  and  more 
involved  in  difficulties.  When  Philolaches' 
easy,  revelling  ways  are  disturbed  by  the  report 
of  his  father's  imminent  return,  Tranio,  the  slave, 
promises  to  ward  off  the  old  man's  possible  inter- 
ference by  keeping  him  out  of  his  own  house, 

vv,388ff,     ,     ,    Taceas:    ego   quo   istaec   sedem 

meditabor  tibi. 
Satin  habes,   si  ego   aduenientem  ita 

patrem  faciam  tuom 
Non  modo  ne  intro  eat,  uerum  etiam 

ut  fugiat  longe  ab  aedibus? 
Vos  modo  hinc  abite  intro  atque  haec 

hinc  propere  amolimini. 

62  Op,  cit.  p.  37. 

63  Liorenz:  Ed.  Introd,  p.l9. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      iii 

He  accomplishes  that  end  by  a  lie,  i.  e.  the  story 
of  the  ghost  haunting  the  house,  vv.475ff., 

cf.    V.531     Quid  ego  hodie  negoti' con  feci  mali. 

vv.422f Quin  etiam  illi  hoc  dicito : 

Facturum,  ut  ne  etiam  aspicere  aedis 

audeat. 
Capita  obuoluto  at  fugiat  cum  sum- 
mo  metu 

show  that  Tranio  has  the  lie  worked  out  although 
he  does  not  state  exactly  what  his  plan  is. 

The  arrival  of  a  danista  to  claim  the  money 
loaned  by  him  to  Philolaches  to  ransom  Phile- 
matium,  vv.539f.,  forces  Tranio  to  conceal  the 
actual  reason  for  the  loan,  so  a  second  lie  is  in- 
vented,— the  purchase  of  the  neighbouring  house, 
vv.637f.  When  Theopropides  wishes  to  inspect 
his  son's  purchase, 

V.674    Cupio  hercle  inspicere  hasce  aedis. 

Tranio  is  again  obliged 

v,7i6    Quo  dolo  a  me  dolorem  procul  pellerem, 

to  invent  a  third  lie  in  order  to  deceive  the  actual 
owner  of  the  house,  Theopropides'  old  friend 
Simo,  as  to  the  reason  for  the  inspection, 

vv.745ff sed  senex 

Gynaeceum  aedificare  uolt  hie  in  suis 
Et  balineas  et  ambulacrum  et  porti- 
cum. 


112        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

So  far  so  good.  But  the  arrival  of  some  ad- 
vorsitores  to  escort  their  young  master,  CalHda- 
mates,  Philolaches'  boon  companion,  home  from 
his  drunken  revels,  betra3's  the  true  state  of  af- 
fairs and  the  lies  are  all  revealed, — the  first  in 
vv.959ff.,  the  second  in  w.gyyfl.,  the  third,  in 
vv.ioioff.  And  Theopropides  duly  acknowl- 
edges, v.  1033  that  he  has  been  hoaxed. 

Thus  the  plot  works  out  clearly  and  logically 
in  spite  of  a  few  incongruities  which  in  no  wise 
affect  the  progress  of  the  trickery,  such  as  Phile- 
matium's  making  her  toilet  on  the  public  street, 
vv.248ff.,  the  sort  of  scene  which  the  exigencies 
of  the  ancient  stage  necessitated.  The  disap- 
pearance of  Philematium  from  the  play,  contra- 
dicting the  careful  character  painting  of  her  in 
the  toilet-scene  shows  how  Plautus^*  pushed  into 
the  background  the  love  affair  of  the  hero  in  or- 
der to  emphasize  the  character  of  the  slave  and 
thus  to  meet  the  demands  of  the  public  for 
amusement. 

In  this  play  the  element  of  time  is  again  dis- 
regarded in  Tranio's  tale  of  the  ghost,®^  and  the 
improbability  that  Theopropides,  in  spite  of  his 
exceptional  stultitia,  does  not  know  a  tale  so  in- 
timately connected  with  his  own  house  is  over- 
looked by  the  poet.  Inasmuch  as  the  poet  could 
have  avoided  these  difficulties,  the  conclusion  is 
evident  that  he  did  not  care  to.  Greater  care- 
lessness is  evident  in  the  scene  between  Theopro- 
pides, Tranio,  and  the  danista.     The  scene  is  im- 

64  Leo:  R6m.  Lit.  pp.114;  117. 
esLangen:  Plaut.   Stud.  p.l70. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      113 

probable  and  it  is  impossible  to  find  a  natural 
and  satisfactory  explanation  for  it,®'  Just  as 
unsatisfactory  is  the  explanation  of  Theopro- 
pides'  ignorance  of  the  plan  of  his  neighbour's 
house  and  Tranio's  escape  from  punishment  at 
the  end. 

In  a  play  like  this  in  which  the  comic  effect  is 
gained  largely^^  by  improvised  and  unexpected 
turns  of  circumstance  which  necessitate  con- 
tinual change  in  plan  and  action,  where  Tranio 
with  his  clever  superiority  symbolizes  this  sort  of 
comedy, — artful  trickery  triumphing  over  prosaic 
worldly  wisdom, — such  unessential  points  may 
justifiably  be  disregarded,  as  they  are,  by  Plau- 
tus. 

Persa. 

Two  lines  of  trickery  are  found  in  the 
Persa.  Toxilus  enlists  the  help  of  both  Sagaris- 
tio,  his  fellow-slave,  and  Saturio,  the  parasite,  to 
ransom  his  sweetheart,  Lemniselenis,  from  a 
leno.  He  succeeds,  but,  as  in  the  Pseudolus, 
there  are  loose  ends  in  the  thread  of  deception. 
In  Act  I  I,  having  laid  his  dilemma  before  Sa- 
garistio,  and  his  need  of  money. 

V.36    Vt  mihi  des  nummos  suscentos, 

and  having  received  his  promise  of  help,  he  as- 
sures Sagaristio  that  he  will  await  him  at  home, 

66  Ibid,  p.171. 

6T  Rltschl:  Opuac.  II  p.740. 


114        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

V.52    Vsque  ero  domi,  dum  excoxero  lenoni  f 
malam. 

But  when  the  latter  has  hit  upon  the  means 
whereby  to  secure  the  money,  i.  e.  by  stealing 
money  which  his  master  has  given  him  to  pur- 
chase some  oxen  in  Eretria,  vv.259ff.,  he  meets 
the  puer  Paegnium  with  the  question. 

V.277    Vbi  Toxilus  est  tuos  erus? 

which,  though  superfluous,  is  perfectly  natural. 
The  question  introduces  one  of  those  digressions 
of  which  Plautus  is  fond,  in  which  two  charac- 
ters abuse  each  other. 

In  Act  II  5,  Toxilus  receives  the  money  from 
Sagaristio  and  in  Act  III  2  arranges  with  the 
leno,  after  much  bandying  of  words,  for  the  re- 
lease of  Lemniselenis. 

The  second  trick  which  is  the  chef  d'oeuvre  of 
the  comedy,  though  more  involved,  has  not  the 
many  inconsistencies  of  the  other  plays;  for  the 
play,  as  Ritschl  says,^^  has  on  the  whole  a  very 
natural,  uniform  trend.  The  two  tricks  are, 
however,  connected,  e.  g.  the  leno  is  made  to  pay 
the  money  which  Toxilus  will  then  pay  back  to 
Sagaristio,  vv.324ff.  The  money  secured  by 
Sagaristio  for  Toxilus  is  necessary  for  the  pur- 
chase of  Toxilus'  arnica  and  is  actually  paid  to 
Dordalus,  v.437.  They  then  get  it  back  by  trick- 
ing the  leno  through  Lucris.     Lemniselenis  must 

68  opusc.  II  p.749. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      115 

be  secured  before  they  trick  the  leno.  The  money, 
to  be  sure,  is  nowhere  actually  paid  back  by  Sa- 
garistio,  but  in  vv.424f.  Toxilus  promises  to  re- 
pay, cf.  vv.676ff.  where  Sagaristio  is  instructed 
to  take  the  money  secured  from  Dordalus  to 
Toxilus'  house;  cf.  also  Saragistio's  jubilant 
bearing  at  the  feast.  The  slaves  paid  600 
nummi  for  Lemniselenis,  i.  e,  1200  drachmae  or 
12  minae.  Thus  they  had  a  handsome  balance 
out  of  Dordalus'  60  minae.  Perhaps  the  poet 
ought  to  say  that  the  stolen  money  has  been  re- 
paid, but  it  is  not  important. 

Langen®^  points  out  inconsistencies  in  details, 
but  none  that  concern  the  internal  working-out  of 
the  trickery.  Such  repetition  as  occurs  in 
vv,33off.,  where  Saturio  says, 

V.334    Communicaui  tecum  consilia  omnia 

and  then  proceeds  to  outline  again  all  the  plans, 
is  as  has  been  noted  before,  for  the  benefit  of  the 
audience. 

The  negotiations  with  the  leno  end  in  his  buy- 
ing Lucris,  suo  periculo,  for  60  minae,  the  exor- 
bitant price  increasing  the  appearance  of  the  de- 
ception played  upon  Dordalus,  which  terminates 
in  the  claim  brought  against  the  leno  by  Lucris' 
father,  Act  IV  7,  and  his  threats  to  bring  suit 
against  him,  v.746.  Of  the  fate  of  the  parasite 
and  his  daughter  nothing  is  said,  but  it  must  be 
remembered  that  they  were  in  Toxilus'  power 
and  were  acting  under  his  threat  to  cut  olT  sup- 

69  Plaut.  stud.  pp.l75ff. 


ii6        DECEPTION   IN    PLAUTUS 

plies,  vv.i4off;  and  the  parasite  always  con- 
cerned about  his  eating,  for  the  sake  of  which  he 
entered  into  the  bargain,  v.  146,  has  not  even  a 
share  in  the  banquet  which  ends  the  play, — a 
banquet  which  has  no  raison  d'etre  save  for 
comic  effect  and  a  still  further  opportunity  for 
the  slaves  to  heap  abuse  and  ridicule  upon  the 
leno. 

Just  as  Philematium,  in  the  Mostellaria,  dis- 
appears from  the  play,  so  here  the  parasite  and 
his  daughter  disappear  after  their  duty  is  per- 
formed. This  disappearance  from  the  plays  of 
various  persons,  who  seem  to  be  brought  in  mere- 
ly to  contribute  their  little  share  to  the  develop- 
ment of  the  plot  and  then  to  drop  out  of  sight, 
is  a  noteworthy  detail.  Palinurus  in  the  Cur- 
culio  is  such  a  character.^"  He  is  supplanted  in 
the  action  by  Curculio.  Similarly  the  hired  fidi- 
cina  in  the  Epidicus,  Callipho  in  the  Pseudolus, 
and  as  just  mentioned,  Philematium  in  the  Mos- 
tellaria, disappear.  In  other  words  it  would 
seem  as  if  the  poet  did  not  care  about  unity  in 
personnel  any  more  than  he  did  about  unity  in 
action.''^  So  long  as  the  deception  moved  along 
a  course  which  afforded  amusing  situations  for 
the  entertainment  of  the  audience  the  purpose  of 
the  play  seems  to  have  been  attained. 

The  psychological  improbabilities  in  the  char- 
acter drawing  of  the  parasite  and  his  daughter, 


70  Leo:  Plaut.  Forsch.  p.l97,  n.l. 

71 H.     W.     Prescott:     The     Interpretation     of     Roman 
Comedy.  Class.    Phil.  XI  No.  2,  April  1916.  pp.128-135. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      117 

noted  by  Langen/^  do  not  aifect  the  trickery, 
nor  do  the  poor  business  methods  of  the  leno,  ex- 
cept, as  we  have  said,  that  the  higher  the  price 
of  the  girl  the  greater  the  impression  of  the  suc- 
cess of  the  trickster,  who  fools  him  into  paying 
it.  The  other  details  mentioned  by  Langen  are 
minor  points  and  the  discrepancies  connected 
with  them  would  easily  escape  an  auditor,  if  not 
a  careful  reader,  of  the  play. 

Poenulus 

The  prologue  of  the  Poenulus  in 
outlining  the  plot  of  the  play  refers  merely  to  the 
anagnorisis,  not  to  the  plot  of  trickery,  vv.i2if.  It 
belongs  therefore  to  only  one  of  the  two  plays 
which  are  combined  to  make  the  Plautine 
comedy, — that  is,  the  Poenulus  is  one  of  the 
"contaminated"  plays,^^  though  scholars  will 
never  agree  as  to  the  original  Greek  elements  and 
the  Plautine  elements  in  the  play.  The  comedy 
contains  two  tricks  against  the  leno,  combined, 
as  Langen  maintains,^*  and  as  we  have  held  for 
the  complexity  of  the  trickery  in  other  comedies, 
to  bring  more  life  into  the  play  and  to  increase 
the  comic  effect,  regardless  of  tihe  inconsistencies 
resulting  from  the  union. 


72  Plaut.    stud.   pp.l75f. 

73L,eo:  Plaut.  Forsch.  pp.  170ff.;  Langen:  Plaut.  Stud. 
pp.lSlff.;  Wllamowltz  in  the  Neue  Jahrb.  1899,  p.519;  Kar- 
sten  in  Mnemos,  1901,  pp.  363fE. ;  Legrand  in  Rev.  d.et.gr. 
1903,  p.358;  Jachmann.  XapiTS?  1911.  pp.249fE.;  op- 
posed by  Goetz,  ind.  lect.  Jena,  1883. 

74  Op.  cit.  p.182. 


ii8        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

The  first  plan  consists  in  involving  the  leno  in 
a  law-suit,  vv.i75ff.,  i84ff.,  for  accepting  stolen 
money  from  a  slave/^  Collabiscus  is  to  be 
primed  to  take  the  part  of  the  slave, 

vv.i94f.     Abeamus  intro,  ut  Collabiscum  uilicum 
Hanc  perdoceamus  ut  ferat  fallaciam, 

and  witnesses,  advocati,  for  the  trial  are  also  en- 
gaged, VV.424,  447,  506.  Collabiscus  is  engaged 
and  given  the  money,  w.4i5f.,  and  all  are  ready 
and  primed  for  their  duties, 

vv.576f.     Euge  opportune  egrediuntur    Milphio 
una  et  uilicus. 
Basilice  exornatus   cedit  et   fabre  ad 
fallaciam. 

of.  vv.557ff.,  where  for  clearness  the  whole  trick 
is  rehearsed. 

The  action  starts  in  earnest  in  Act  III  3  and 
the  money  is  handed  over  to  the  leno,  vv.713., 
which  he  accepts  to  his  undoing, 

vv.726f.     Em  istaec  uolo  ergo  uos  commeminisse 
omnia 
Mox  quom  ad  praetorem  usus  ueniet, 

and  the  trial  is  to  come  off  on  the  next  day, 
V.800. 

75  The  money  is  supposed  to  have  been  stolen  from  the 
slave's  master. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      119 

But  the  whole  trick  is  purposeless/'  and  Mil- 
phio,  the  architectus  doli,  in  inexplicable  ignor- 
ance of  the  outcome  of  his  plots,  starts  out  upon 
a  second  trick, 

vv.8i7f.     Exspecto,    quo    pacto    meae    techinae 
processurae  sient. 
Studeo  hunc  lenonem  perdere: 

to  cheat  the  leno  of  his  property,  vv.894flf .,  on  the 
ground  that  the  girls  in  whose  interests  he  and 
his  master  are  working  are  free-bom  Carthagin- 
ians, V.900. 

Hanno,  the  Poenus,  arrives  opportunely  and  is 
engaged  to  help  along  the  trick  by  passing  himself 
off  as  the  father  of  the  girls,  vv.i099fT.  The  pre- 
tense turns  out  to  be  a  fact.  Act  V  4,  when  Hanno 
recognizes  the  girls,  v.  1256,  and  the  leno  is  to  re- 
ceive his  due  reward, 

V.I 343 In  ius  te  uoco. 

The  question  of  double  or  triple  ending  does  not 
affect  the  deception  and  the  methods  of  its  ac- 
complishment. 

As  we  have  already  noted,  most  of  the  incon- 
sistencies and  loose  ends  in  the  two  tricks  are 
due  to  the  fact  that  the  play  is  "contaminated". 
To  that  cause  are  likewise  due  the  contradic- 
tions in  the  characterization,  especially  of  the 
two    girls,^^    cf.    the    virgo    in    the    Persa.     In 

76  Leo:   Plaut.  Porsch.  p.   172;  Teuftel:   Stud.   u.   Char. 
p.337f. 

77  Langen:  op.  clt.  pp.l82ff. 


I20        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

this  play  also  is  found  haste  contradicted  by  de- 
lay, vv.3i7ff.  As  Langen  shows/*  disagreeing 
with  Goetz's  rejection  of  w.330-408  as  un-Plau- 
tine/*  and  as  we  have  noted  in  regard  to  the 
other  plays  in  which  this  same  detail  occurs, 
Plautus  desired  to  entertain  and  amuse  his  au- 
dience rather  than  to  take  into  consideration  the 
laws  of  dramatic  art. 

Most  of  the  other  inconsistencies  noted  by 
Langen  concern  details  in  the  final  anagnorisis 
and  need  not  be  considered  here.  Suffice  it  to 
say  that  in  the  Poenulus,  as  in  the  Miles,  in  spite 
of  the  rather  loose  combination  of  two  plots,  the 
progress  of  the  deception  is  always  clearly  and 
definitely  worked  out. 

Pseudolus 

All  the  interest  of  the  Pseudolus 
IS  concentrated  upon  the  clever  slave  who  gives 
the  name  to  the  play,®°  from  the  very  beginning 
when,  V.I 9,  io5flF.,  he  offers  his  help  to  his  young 
master,  Calidorus,  in  his  efforts  to  release  Phoe- 
nicium  from  the  leno,  Ballio,  till  the  end  when 
the  method  used  to  attain  that  object,  i.  e.  per- 
sonation, is  disclosed  by  the  appearance  of  the 
real  Harpax,  The  chief  beauty  of  the  play  lies 
in  the  fact  that  the  rogue  warns  his  intended 
victims,  VV.382,  5iof.,  but  in  spite  of  warnings 
they  are  cheated.       The  leno  is,  of  course,  the 

78  Ibid.  p.  193. 

79  Act.  80C.  phll.  Lips.  VI  p.  313,  cited  by  Liangen. 

80  Schanz:  I.  Mttller's  Handbuch,  VIII  I  1.  p.85. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      121 

chief  enemy  against  whom  the  artifices  of  Pseu- 
dolus  are  directed,  vv.233,  382,  526ff.,  and  in  ad- 
dition to  the  constant  threats  against  the  leno, 
throughout  the  play,  and  the  general  attitude 
characteristic  of  comedy  of  hostility  against  the 
leno  as  the  villain  of  the  piece, 

V.905     di  immortales 

uolunt  esse  et  lenonem  ex- 

tinctum 

prepares  the  audience  for  the  final  discomfiture 
of  Ballio. 

But  Pseudolus  plans  to  approach  the  old  man 
Simo,  Calidorus'  father,  for  the  needed  money, 
V.I 20,  if  other  sources  fail,  even  though  when  the 
leno  suggests  such  a  possibility,  Pseudolus,  as- 
suming a  virtue  which  he  does  not  have,  indig- 
nantly objects,  V.288.  Upon  Ballio's  persistence 
in  adhering  to  a  "spot-cash"  bargain,  Pseudolus 
utters  his  direct  threat  against  him,  v.382,  and 
bids  Calidorus,  v.385,  389,  furnish  him  with  an 
assistant. 

From  all  this  planning  and  threatening  on  the 
part  of  Pseudolus,  the  audience  would  infer  that 
he  has  his  plans  definitely  laid  out.  So  the  mono- 
logue in  Act  I  4  comes  as  a  surprise,  especially 

W.397       Quoi  neque  paratast  gutta  certi  con- 
sili. 

io6f.    Atque  id  futurum  unde  unde  dicam 
nescio. 
Nisi  quia  futurumst : 


122        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

That  he  was  actually  plotting  against  his  old 
master,  though  with  no  definite  plan  in  mind,  not- 
withstanding his  pretended  scorn  of  Ballio's  sug- 
gestion, is  revealed  again  here,  v.407,  as  is  also 
the  fact  that  Simo  has  heard  of  the  slave's  inten- 
tions, VV.408,  426.  Yet  in  spite  of  that  dis- 
covery, the  slave  is  still  confident  of  success, 
vv.4i2f.,  and  warns  Simo  to  beware  of  him, 
vv.5iofF.,  the  repetition  of  the  warning  heighten- 
ing the  comic  effect  as  well  as  anticipating  the 
actual  accomplishment  of  the  trickery.  Pseudo- 
lus  admits  that  he  was  preparing  to  get  money 
from  Simo,  vv.485fF.,  but  since  his  intentions  are 
known  he  insists  that  Simo  shall  give  it,  vv.508, 
510,  518,  cf.  V.530. 

The  necessity  of  carrying  out  this  threat  re- 
minds Pseudolus  of  the  trick  against  Ballio 
which  he  must  accomplish,  vv.524f.  He  seizes 
upon  Simo's  interest,  indicated  by  his  question, 

v.  526    Quam  pugnam? 

to  unite  his  forces  and  to  settle  both  promises  at 
once.  In  securing  the  money  by  the  bet,  on  the 
part  of  Simo,  trickery  is  not  necessarily  implied. 
But  against  Ballio  trickery  is  implied.*^  The 
difficulties  inherent  in  Pseudolus'  plan  and  their 
possible  cause,  i.  e.  contaminatio,  will  be  dis- 
cussed later. 

Simo's  attitude  here  may  seem  inconsistent  to 
some,  who  hold  that  the  old  man  too  easily  takes 
up  the  bet.     Simo  is  merely  cocksure.     It  may 

81  Liorenz:  Pseudolus,  ed.  Introd.  pp.l91T. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      123 

be  that  Plautus  has  merely  followed  that  trend 
of  comedy  mentioned  before,  of  making  the  leno 
the  butt  of  all  classes ;  and  the  old  man's  atten- 
tion is  turned  aside  from  his  personal  difficulties 
and  danger,  and  with  an  old  man's  forgetfulness 
and  desire  to  get  ahead  of  someone  else  he  takes 
up  the  wager.  He  has,  too,  sporting  blood  in 
him,  cf.  his  bet  with  Ballio,  when  his  suspicions 
of  collusion  between  Pseudolus  and  the  leno 
against  himself,  vv.539fif.,  suggest  to  him  his  bar- 
gain with  the  leno  against  Pseudolus,  vv.869ff., 
cf.  vv.io7oflf.  At  least  it  prepares  the  audience 
for  that  wager  when  Ballio,  exultant  in  his  belief 
that  Simo's  warnings  to  him  to  beware  of  Pseu- 
dolus have  been  needless,  takes  up  Simo's  offer. 
(It  might  be  noted  that  with  this  wager  Simo  is 
again  brought  into  the  play,  after  three  acts  in 
which  the  action  centres  only  in  the  tricks  against 
the  leno. )  In  other  words  the  wager  makes  only 
one  trick  necessary. 

Already  in  the  beginning  of  the  play,  as  has 
been  noted  above,  Pseudolus  had  realized  the  dif- 
ficulty of  his  position  and  had  sent  Calidorus  to 
get  some  assistant,  v.385.  Now  under  still 
greater  stress  of  circumstances  Pseudolus  enlists 
the  help  of  CaUipho,  v.547.  But  when  chance, 
Tuxri,  intervents  to  bring  Harpax,  the  agent 
of  the  miles,  who  intends  to  claim  Phoenicium  by 
making  the  final  payment  due  the  leno,  new  dif- 
ficulties arise, 

V.601     Nouo  consilio  nunc  mihi  opus  est:  noua 
res  haec  subito  mi  obiectast. 


124        DECEPTION   IN    PLAUTUS 

.    .    .   ilia  omnia  missa  habeo  quae  ante 
agere  occepi. 


V.614     ....  procudam  ego  hodie  hinc  multos 
dolos. 


cf .  vv.672ff.,  which  however  bring  with  them  the 
opportunity  of  deceiving  three  people,  vv.691, 
705a. 

Harpax'  arrival  is  prepared  for  both  by  Phoe- 
nicium's  letter,  vv.5iff.,  with  her  statement  of  the 
impending  sale  and  the  details  coincident  with  it, 
the  symbolus,  letter,  etc.,  and  again  by  the  leno's 
account  of  the  sale,  v.346,  and  his  anticipation  of 
the  payment  of  the  money  that  day,  v.373.  Har- 
pax upon  his  arrival,  by  his  first  words,  v.598, 
meets  the  requirements  of  that  preparation.  This 
is  a  good  illustration  of  the  way  in  which  Plautus 
is  generally  careful  to  make  all  the  details  of  his 
trickery  clear,  both  in  preparation  and  in  execu- 
tion. This  fact  will  be  discussed  at  greater  length 
at  the  end  of  the  analysis  of  this  play,  in  a  sum- 
mary of  the  repetitions  for  clearness  which  oc- 
cur in  the  play. 

Pseudolus'  determination  to  carry  out  his  plot 
somehow,  vv.567f.,  results  in  definite  plans, 
vv.579ff.,  which  have  to  be  relinquished  vv.6oiflf., 
upon  the  arrival  of  Harpax.  But  his  apparent 
unpreparedness  adds  to  the  comic  and  dramatic 
effect  of  the  plan,  vv.6oif.,  which  occurs  to  the 
clever  slave  upon  his  meeting  with  Harpax.  A 
somewhat  similar  situation  is  found  in  the  Asi- 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      125 

nana,*'  where  the  appearance  of  the  mercator 
suggests  at  once  to  Leonida  his  plan  of  persona- 
tion. In  the  Pseudolus,  to  be  sure,  there  is  a 
double  personation, — of  Ballio's  chief  slave  by 
Pseudolus,  V.609,  and  of  Harpax  by  Simia.  Here 
Pseudolus  partially  convinces  Harpax,  by  his 
knowledge  of  the  latter's  business,  cf.  vv.6i6flf. 
which  repeat  again  the  information  given  to  the 
audience  in  Phoenicium's  letter,  and  by  Ballio 
himself ;  and  Harpax,  though  refusing  to  give  the 
money,  hands  over  that  which,  like  the  miles' 
ring  in  the  Curculio,  is  of  more  value  for  the 
trickster's  purpose  than  money, — i.  e,  the  symbo- 
lus,  VV.647.  Harpax  retires  to  an  inn  to  await 
Ballio's  pleasure,  while  Pseudolus  makes  use  of 
his  lucky  turn,  vv.669f.  He  realizes  that  money 
and  proof  are  now  within  his  power,  v.671.  All 
that  he  needs  is  some  "canny"  assistant,  vv.724flF. 
While  outlining  his  new  plan  to  Calidorus, 
vv.725ff.,  of  the  personation  of  Harpax,  Pseudo- 
lus accepts  Charinus'  offer  of  Simia  as  an  assist- 
ant, and  money;  and  he  is  now  sure  of  his  bet, 
vv.73iff.  He  goes  off  to  the  forum  to  engage 
Simia's  services,  vv.764f.,  and  to  instruct  him  as 
to  his  duties. 

That  instruction  is  given  off  the  stage,  v.941, 
but  the  audience  has  been  told,  vv.725ff.,  and 
Simia  upon  his  appearance  in  Act  IV  under- 
stands his  role.  That  Ballio  is  the  object  of  all 
their  intrigue  is  clear  from  the  dialogue  between 
Simia  and  Pseudolus,  Act  IV  i,  and  from  Act  IV 

82  cf.  Terence:  Phormlo. 


126        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

2,  where  the  appearance  of  the  leno  gives  the 
plotters  the  opportunity  of  playing  their  trick 
upon  him.  The  plans  are  carried  out  and  Pseu- 
dolus  is  successful  in  his  abduction  of  Phoeni- 
cium,  vv.i052ff.  Callipho's  help  is  not  used  as 
it  had  not  been  required  and  so  had  been  dropped. 
(Note  Pseudolus'  aside  in  vv.984f.,  which  indi- 
cates a  point  overlooked  in  the  plans  for  the  per- 
sonation,— i.  e.  the  name  of  the  miles.  Simia 
is  clever  enough  to  evade  the  danger  by  making 
Ballio  himself  supply  the  name.  The  mere  fact 
of  Pseudolus'  dismay  at  the  omission  intimates 
that  all  details  necessary  for  the  execution  of 
trickery  were,  as  a  rule,  carefully  indicated.  The 
meeting  of  such  a  crisis  is,  however,  a  common 
device  to  display  the  trickster's  resourcefulness.) 

The  leno,  confident  in  his  apparent  escape  from 
any  possible  plot  against  himself  on  the  part  of 
Pseudolus,  now  that  he  has  delivered  Phoeni- 
cium  presumably  to  Harpax,  readily  takes  up 
Simo's  wager,  before  mentioned.  With  the  ar- 
rival of  Simo  upon  the  scene,  v.  1063,  the  so- 
lution of  Pseudolus'  plots  against  him  is  intro- 
duced and  the  appearance  of  the  real  Harpax, 
who  offers  the  money  which  he  had  brought  from 
the  miles,  discloses  Pseudolus'  stratagems,  Act 
IV  7,  V.1213,  whereby  Ballio  has  been  cheated  of 
the  girl  and  the  purchase-money  which  he  has  to 
return  to  the  real  Harpax,  v.1183,  and  of  the 
wager  to  Simo. 

Simo  himself  prepares,  vv.i24if.,  to  pay  his 
own  wager  to  Pseudolus,  which  the  slave  claims 
for  his  successful  accomplishment  of  all  his  plots. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      127 

V.1312,  but  which  he  consents  finally  to  share 
with  his  master,  vv.i328f. 

Repetition  as  a  means  of  obtaining  clearness  in 
the  details  of  trickery  has  been  mentioned  above. 
This  is  especially  noteworthy  in  the  details  of  the 
sale  of  Phoenicium  to  the  miles.  As  has  been 
stated,  they  are  first  given  by  Phoenicium  herself 
in  her  letter  to  her  lover,  vv.5iff.  The  leno  re- 
peats them  when  he  informs  Calidorus  that  he 
has  disposed  of  the  girl,  vv.342flf.  When  Pseu- 
dolus  meets  Harpax  and  inquires  into  his  busi- 
ness, vv,6i6flF.,  the  details  are  again  minutely 
given,  as  they  are  also  when  Pseudolus  reports 
to  his  master  his  success  in  obtaining  the  symbo- 
lus  and  letter  from  the  miles'  messenger,  Har- 
pax, vv.7i6ff.  Again  when  Simia  plays  his  role 
of  pseudo-Harpax,  vv.994ff.,  all  the  details  are 
again  rehearsed,  as  they  are  when  Ballio  reports 
to  Simo,  vv.  1 09  iff.,  how  he  has  presumably  out- 
witted Pseudolus.  Finally  when  the  real  Har- 
pax turns  up  to  carry  out  his  master's  injunctions, 
vv.ii22ff.,  the  same  details  are  once  more  out- 
lined. In  other  words,  Plautus  keeps  constant- 
ly before  the  audience  the  thread  of  trickery. 

In  similar  fashion  the  fact  that  Pseudolus  is 
the  trickster  is  kept  before  the  audience,  from  his 
first  offer  to  help  his  young  master,  v.  19,  and  the 
reiteration  of  indefinite  help,  vv.79,  104,  ii8ff., 
to  his  general  threat  to  everyone  to  beware 
of  him,  vv.i25ff.  Again  in  v.232  his  assurance 
to  Calidorus  is  repeated,  as  is  his  promise  to  the 
leno  for  his  master  in  w.3i6f.  And  the  identity 
of  Pseudolus  is  clearly  kept  before  the  audience. 


128        DECEPTION   IN   PLAUTUS 

in  addition  to  the  evident  relations  existing  be- 
tween him  and  CaHdorus,  by  Simo's  explanation 
to  his  friend  Callipho,  vv.445ff.,  and  by  Cali- 
dorus'  to  his  friend  Charinus,  vv.70off. 

One  other  repetition  may  be  noted — the  sum  of 
money  needed  by  Calidorus  to  meet  the  leno's  de- 
mands,— 20  minae,  vv.52,  113,  114,  117,  280,  344, 
404,  412,  484,  1070. 

Repetition  then  is  one  of  the  means  whereby 
Plautus  gains  clearness  of  plan  and  execution  in 
trickery.  It  is  in  fact  the  most  important  point 
in  a  study  of  the  technique  of  trickery  in  the 
Plautine  comedies. 

Such  care  being  therefore  evidently  a  charac- 
teristic of  Plautus'  methods  where  important  de- 
tails are  concerned,  wherever  the  opposite  occurs, 
as  in  the  two  requests  to  Calidorus  for  an  assist- 
ant,*^ and  in  the  disappearance  of  Callipho,®* 
when  his  help  had  been  quite  evidently  enlisted, 
some  explanation  must  be  found.  Contaminatio 
has  been  adopted  as  the  explanation  by  Langen 
and  Lorenz,  but  another  more  natural  one  is  pos- 
sible. Calidorus  brings  Charinus,  who  does  not 
answer  well  to 

v. 385     Ad    earn    rem    usust    hominem    astutum 
doctum,  cautum  et  callidum, 

but  fits  vv.39oflF. 


83  Langen:  Plaut.  Stud.  p.20S. 

84  Ibid,  p.202;  Lorenz:  Pseudolus,   ed.  Introd.  p.20. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      129 

Pauci  ex  multis  sunt  amici,  homini  qui 

certi  sient. 
Ps.     Ego  scio  istuc:  ergo  utrumque  tibi 

nunc  dilectum  para 
Atque  ex  multis  exquire  illis  unum  qui 

certus  siet. 

At  V.385  Pseudolus  apparently  has  in  mind  a  fel- 
low of  the  tricky  type,  but  we  must  remember 
that  he  has  as  yet  no  definite  plans  and  he  does 
not  know  Charinus,  cf.  v.699.  Moreover,  he 
agrees  with  Calidorus'  intention  to  bring  a  friend, 
vv.39off.  When  Calidorus  and  Charinus  ap- 
pear, Pseudolus  has  already  begun  his  real  trick 
and  knows  exactly  the  kind  of  a  helper  he  needs, 
vv.725fT.,  and  Charinus  furnishes  Simia.  There 
is  no  serious  defect  here.  It  is  indeed  not  hard 
to  assume  that  Pseudolus  expected  the  friend, 
Charinus,  to  be  able  to  help  him  more  directly, 
but  since  his  plan  has  become  definite,  the  tj^e 
of  assistant  needed  has  changed. 

As  for  Callipho,  his  help  also  was  enlisted  at 
the  time  when  Pseudolus  did  not  know  what  he 
was  going  to  do.  Indeed  the  statement  that 
Callipho  will  remain  at  home  ready  to  help,  if 
needed,  is  a  good  motivation  of  his  absence  dur- 
ing the  rest  of  the  play.^^  Callipho's  part  is 
really  played  in  the  one  scene.  The  reason  for 
Callipho's  disappearance  may  be  more  easily  dis- 
covered if  it  is  compared  with  the  disappearance 
of  similar  characters,  as  of  Apoecides  in  the  Epi- 

86  cf.   Sosla  IQ  Terence's  Andria.  first  iscene,  end. 


I30        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

dicus,  of  the  parasite  and  the  virgo  in  the  Persa, 
of  Libanus  in  the  Asinaria,  of  PaHnurus  in  the 
Curcuho,  of  Philematium  in  the  Mostellaria, 
which  was  discussed  above.  All  these  charac- 
ters drop  out  of  the  plays  when  their  contribu- 
tion to  the  progress  of  the  plot  has  been  made. 
So  there  is  no  reason  to  attribute  that  disappear- 
ance to  contaminatio  as  Langen  does.^® 

Langen's*^  (and  Lorenz's^*)  objection  to  the 
tardiness  of  Calidorus'  revelation  of  his  difficul- 
ties to  his  confidential  slave,  vv.i6f.,  when  all 
the  city  knows  of  them,  vv.4i8ff.,  can  be  met  by 
the  requirements  of  the  play,  in  that  the  revela- 
tion is  made  for  the  information  of  the  audience 
through  this  expository  scene.  The  fact  that 
the  letter  in  Act  I  i,  vv.5iff.,  belongs  to  the  ex- 
position of  the  plot  against  the  leno  and  so  has 
no  integral  connection  with  the  scene  in  which 
it  stands,  inasmuch  as  that  entire  scene  belongs 
really  to  the  plot  against  the  father,  may  be,  as 
Leo  has  pointed  out,*®  an  indication  of  contamin- 
atio. But  if  the  Pseudolus  is  "contaminated", 
Plautus  has  done  the  work  so  well  that  no  satis- 
factory proof  of  contaminatio  has  as  yet  been  ad- 
duced. The  reference  to  "touching"  the  old  man 
Simo  may  be  merely  a  jest.  At  any  rate  the  play 
contains  no  trick  against  Simo. 

No  connection  with  the  plot  of  deception  is 
evident  in  the  inconsistencies  of  Ballio's  orders 

86  Ibid, 

87  Ibid,  p.198. 

88  Op.  cit.  p.  25. 

89  a.  a.  N.  1903,  pp.  347ff. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      131 

given  to  his  household  from  the  street, 
vv.i55ff.,^°  especially  to  Phoenicium,  who  already 
sold  to  the  miles  should  be  regarded  as  released 
from  such  orders  on  the  part  of  the  leno ;  in  the 
relative  positions  on  the  stage  of  Pseudolus  and 
Ballio  in  vv.243ff . ;  in  Ballio's  haste  contradicted 
by  his  tarrying  to  argue  with  Calidorus, 
vv.25oflF . ;  in  Pseudolus'  appearance  in  Act  V. 
from  a  drunken  revel ;  in  the  slave's  exaggerated 
jubilation  at  his  victory  over  Simo  at  the  end, 
and  the  inconsistent  treatment  of  the  master  by 
his  slave.®^ 

The  contradiction  between  Harpax'  willing- 
ness to  give  Pseudolus  the  letter  and  sym- 
bol, when  he  has  refused  the  money,  which  is  not 
nearly  so  important,**^  is  explained  by  the  necessi- 
ties of  the  plot.  Moreover,  the  money  seems  more 
important  to  Harpax,  and  probably  to  the  audi- 
ence, since  he  has  been  convinced  that  Pseudolus 
is  Ballio's  slave  and  cannot  know  that  Pseudolus 
will  misuse  the  symbolus,  etc.  For  the  accom- 
plishment of  his  trick  Pseudolus  needed  the  letter 
and  the  seal,  hence  Plautus'  disregard  of  plausi- 
bility in  the  method  of  obtaining  them. 

The  complications  arising  in  vv.524if .,  are  hard 
to  explain,  where  Pseudolus  plans,°^  first  to  out- 
wit the  leno,  then  to  get  money  from  Simo,  when 
Simo  offers  to  give  him  the  money  if  he  accom- 
plishes both,  his  offer  thus  pre-supposing  Pseu- 

80  Langen:  op.  clt.  p.l99. 
MLegrand:  Daos,  p.  403. 

92  Langen:  op.  cit.  pp.202flf. 

93  Leo:  G.  G.   N.   1903,  p.350;  Langen:  op.  cit.   pp.201f. 


132        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

dolus'  obtaining  the  money  from  himself. 
Leo^*  attributed  them  to  contaminatio,  i.  e.  to  an 
unsuccessful  attempt  to  combine  two  tricks  from 
two  plays,  one  with  a  plot  of  the  confounding  of 
the  leno,  the  other  of  the  befooling  of  the  senex. 
This  passage  is  certainly  not  clear.  Pseudolus 
will  first  cheat  Ballio  out  of  the  girl;  second,  ap- 
parently cheat  Simo  out  of  the  money;  third,  win 
a  bet,  i.  e.  money,  from  Simo  if  he  accomplishes 
the  first  and  second.  But  again  we  have  to  re- 
member that  Harpax'  arrival  and  Charinus'  aid 
provide  Pseudolus  with  the  necessary  money  for 
the  first,  and  that  he  abandoned  any  plan  he  may 
have  had  against  Simo.  Nevertheless,  the  bet  is 
paid  because  Pseudolus  has  accomplished  only 
one  of  his  promises.  Perhaps  we  have  not  a  case 
of  contaminatio,  but  Plautus  has  simply  cut  out 
the  trick  against  Simo  and  neglected  to  change 
vv.507ff.,  especially  v.529  sufficiently.  Bierma®^ 
attributes  such  carelessness  in  composition  to  the 
nature  and  genius  of  the  playwright  and  to  the 
uncritical  nature  of  the  audience,  an  explanation 
to  which  we  have  had  occasion  to  refer  before. 
This  fact  also  explains  partially  the  difference 
between  the  plays  of  Plautus  and  Terence. 

To  the  many  weaknesses  in  the  intrigue  of  this 
play  Lorenz®®  would  attribute  the  fact  of  the  few 
imitations  of  it  in  later  times.  It  is  quite  evident 
from  our  discussion  that  the  plot  does  not  move 

94  Ibid. 

95  Quaestiones  de  Plautlna  Pseudolo,  Groningen,  1897, 
pp.34ff. 

86  Pseudolus,  ed.  Introd.  p.30  note  30. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      133 

as  smoothly  as  in  some  of  the  other  comedies. 
But  it  certainly  is  more  successful  than  the  clear- 
ly "contaminated"  play,  the  Miles. 

Trinummus. 

The  thensaurus  about  which  the 
stratagem  of  Megaronides  and  Callicles  is 
planned  is  first  mentioned  in 

V.I 50    Thensaurum  demonstrauit  mihi  in  hisce 
aedibus, 

cf.  w.i58f.  Callicles  states  his  reason  for  pur- 
chasing the  house, — to  save  the  treasure  for  a 
possible  dowry  for  his  ward,  w.iygi.  The  need 
arises,  vv.374f .,  which  Lesbonicus,  the  girl's  bro- 
ther, tries  to  meet,  vv.5o8f.,  but  he  fails  and 
finally  agrees  to  give  his  sister  to  his  friend,  sine 
dote,  v.693.  Callicles,  their  guardian,  does  not 
like  this  bargain,  v.612,  but  cannot  tell  Lesboni- 
cus about  the  treasure. 

The  first  part  of  the  play,  then,  up  to  Act  III, 
is  a  mere  family  plot,  with  no  intrigue.  The 
guardian's  desire  to  supply  his  ward  with  the 
needed  dowry  leads  him  finally  to  consult  his 
friend  Megronides.  Between  them  they  evolve 
a  plan,  vv.765flf.,  of  hiring  someone, — i.  e.  per- 
sonation,— to  bring  a  message  supposedly  from 
the  girl's  father,  vv.77off.,  and  money  for  a 
dowry,  vv.778f.,  which  shall  in  reality  be  the 
thensaurus,  w.782ff.,  unearthed  for  the  purpose 
by  Callicles,  without  arousing  the  young  man's 
suspicions. 


134        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

vv.784ff.     Suspicionem  ab  adulescente  amoueris, 
Censebit  aurum  esse  a  patre  allatum 

tibi: 
Tu  de  thensauro  sumes. 

The  speeches  of  the  sycophanta,  vv.852ff.,  show- 
that  the  ruse  made  by  the  strategists  is  carried 
out  in  all  its  details,  but  its  success  is  thwarted  by 
the  unexpected  return  of  the  father  himself.  The 
fact  of  the  deception  is  emphasized  also  by  the 
agent, 

V.867    Apud  illas  aedis  sistendae  mihi  sunt  syco- 
phantiae, 

all  of  the  details  of  which  are  repeated,  vv.955flF., 
in  the  sycophant's  revelation  to  Charmides,  the 
father.  An  explanation  follows,  vv.iiooff., 
when  the  old  men  meet. 

In  this  play  appear  improbabilities  like 
those  found  in  the  plays  already  treated, — 
the  consultation  about  the  secret  treasure  in  the 
open  street,^^  Charmides'  deflection  from  an  im- 
mediate entrance  into  his  own  house,  after  hear- 
ing the  sycophant's  business,  to  satisfy  his  curi- 
osity about  a  man  running  down  the  street ;  Stasi- 
mus'  long  monologue,  vv.ioopff.,  in  spite  of  his 
apparent  hurry.  These  are  all  details  of  minor 
importance  and  of  the  sort  generally  treated 
carelessly  by  Plautus.  As  to  the  difficulties  at- 
tendant upon  Callicles'  appropriation  of  the  hid- 
den treasure  for  the  girl's  dowry ,^®  and  his  evi- 

97  Langen:   Plaut.   Stud.   pp.219f. 

»8lbid.:  pp.227ff.;  Brix:  ed.  note  on  v.755. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      135 

dent  readiness  to  dig  it  up  and  use  it  in  carrying 
out  his  trick  when  formerly  fear  of  discovery  of 
such  an  act  on  his  part  by  Lesbonicus  had  pre- 
vented such  appropriation, — these  present  just 
the  sort  of  inconsistencies  which  the  poet  is  al- 
ways ready  to  overlook  for  the  sake  of  the  trick 
which  he  is  working  out.  The  details  regarding 
Lesbonicus'  dwelling,  after  his  sale  of  his  paren- 
tal home,  and  the  neighbour  Philto's  inquiry,  im- 
plying as  it  does  ignorance  of  a  fact  which  one 
would  expect  a  neighbour  to  know,  do  not  con- 
cern the  progress  of  the  plot  of  deception.  More- 
over, such  apparently  essential  facts  are  fre- 
quently neglected  by  Plautus,  cf.,  the  ignorance 
on  the  part  of  Theopropides,  in  the  Mostellaria, 
of  the  arrangement  of  his  friend  Simo's  house. 

Amphitruo 

The  plot  of  the  Amphitruo  like 
that  of  the  Captivi  rests  upon  an  exchange  of 
roles.®®  And  as  Mercury  foretells  in  the  pro- 
logue, vv.54f.,  59,  comedy  and  tragedy  combine 
in  the  play,  though  the  amusing  situations  pre- 
dominate. Mercury  also  carefully  explains  all 
the  details  of  Jupiter's  personation  of  Amphitruo 
and  his  own  of  the  slave  Sosia,  so  that  the  au- 
dience may  appreciate  the  ensuing  complications. 
The  action  starts  at  once  upon  the  meeting  of 
Sosia  and  Mercury,  the  pseudo-Sosia,  in  Act  I  i, 
when  Mercury  tries  the  effect  of  his  disguise 

99  cf.  the  Eunuchus  of  Terence. 


136        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

upon  his  counterpart,  v.265.  Mercury  succeeds 
in  evicting  Sosia,  in  Jupiter's  interests,  vv,463ff. 

Jupiter's  assumption  of  the  person  of  Amphi- 
truo  is  proved  by  the  goblet  which  he  gives  to 
Alcumena  in  Act  i  3  and  which  causes  so  much 
confusion  later,  vv.73iff.,  780,  792.  In  Act  III 
I,  Jupiter  states,  as  Mercury  did  in  the  prologue, 
his  ability  to  change  his  identity  at  will,  v.864, 
and  promises  a  final  clearing-up  of  all  the  dif- 
ficulties, vv.876ff.  That  explanation  occurs  in 
vv.ioSsflf. 

The  Amphitruo  might  be  called  the  comple- 
ment of  the  Menaechmi,  inasmuch  as  it  depicts 
intentional  confusion  arising  from  the  assump- 
tion of  co-identity,  whereas  that  in  the  Menaech- 
mi depends  upon  unconscious  similarity. 

None  of  the  difficulties  cited  by  Langen^°"  pre- 
vents a  complete  understanding  of  the  plot.  The 
course  of  the  deception  is  clearly  outlined  before- 
hand, in  the  prologue,  and  is  assisted  by  the  many 
repetitions  and  explanations  to  a  final  successful 
close.^°^ 

C.    Special  Details 

Under  this  heading  may  be  grouped  such  de- 
tails as  have  already  received  some  consideration 

100  Op.  cit.  pp.  91ff. 

101  The  Amphitruo  has  been  placed  last  In  the  analysis 
of  the  plays  with  the  view  of  merely  summing  up  the 
play.  Inasmuch  as  it  differs  from  the  other  plays  both  in 
the  nature  of  the  plot  and  in  the  characters.  But  in 
technique  of  deception  it  is  similar  to  the  other  plays  in 
'Which  personation  is  used. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      137 

in  the  discussion  of  the  object  and  nature  of  de- 
ception or  of  the  methods  whereby  that  decep- 
tion is  carried  out.  But  the  recurrence  of  them 
in  several  plays,  as  for  example  the  intervention 
of  Tu/Y),  discussed  above/  or  the  uniqueness 
of  a  certain  feature  as  the  absence  of  women 
from  the  Captivi,  renders  a  summary  of  them  at 
this  point  desirable. 

(i)  Chance — Td^f] — as  a  force  to  be  reckoned 
with  in  the  plays  has  already  been  discussed. 
It  will  suffice  then  here  merely  to  men- 
tion the  four  plays  in  which  it  intervenes  in  an 
important  manner,  the  Bacchides,  Epidicus, 
Poenulus  and  Pseudolus.  (Chance  is  constant- 
ly a  minor  feature  in  all  drama.) 

(2)  Anagnorisis — the  recognition-scene,  which 
as  will  be  seen  later  is  derived  from  tragedy  and 
especially  from  Euripides,  is  the  ending  of  the 
Captivi,  Casina,  Curculio,  Epidicus,  Menaechmi 
and  Poenulus.  Of  the  plays  in  which  the  chief 
interest  is  not  centered  in  the  trickery,  the  Ru- 
dens  and  the  Cistellaria^  also  end  with  an  anag- 
norisis, as  did  also  the  Vidularia  probably.  Here 
it  is  possible  to  see  Plautus'  adherence  to  a  fea- 
ture popular  among  his  predecessors  in  spite  of 
his  more  frequent  departure  from  the  norm  set 
by  them.  The  connection  of  this  feature  with 
the  plot  of  deception  is  made  usually  by  a  dis- 

1  cf.  II  B  4  above,  pp.40-43. 

2  Leo:   Plaut.  Forsch.  pp.l58f. 


138        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

closure  of  the  plans  of  the  trickster,  as  in  the 
Poenulus  and  the  Epidicus,  when  a  recognition 
between  the  persons  involved  in  those  plans  leads 
to  an  explanation  of  the  situation  in  which  they 
severally  find  themselves. 

(3)  Banquet-scenes — occur  in  the  Asinaria, 
Bacchides,  Persa,  and  Stichus,  as  has  already 
been  noted,  either  as  an  integral  part  of  the  play 
or  as  an  additional  feature  at  the  close  included 
for  comic  or  dramatic  effect. 

(4)  Absence  of  women. 

The  prologue  of  Captivi  presents  as  a  proof.of 
the  superiority  of  the  play  the  absence  of  some 
characters  which  play  so  large  a  part  in  the  other 
comedies, 

vv.54ff.     Profecto  expediet  fabulae  huic  operam 

dare: 
Non  pertractate  factast  neque  item  ut 

ceterae, 
Neque    spurcidici    insunt    uersus    im- 

memorabiles : 
Hie  neque  periurus   lenost  nee  mere- 

trix  mala 
Neque  miles  gloriosus. 

In  a  way  this  might  also  be  said  of  the  Trinum- 
mus.  But  the  latter  play  contains  that  romantic 
situation  from  which  the  Captivi  is  free.  And 
this  situation,  though  the  girl  does  not  appear  in 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      139 

person  in  the  play,  controls  the  action  to  a  large 
extent. 

The  other  details  to  be  considered  concern  the 
trickery  more  closely  than  those  just  mentioned. 

(5)  Warnings 

As  a  preparation  for  the  deception,  several  of 
the  plays  contain  warnings  of  various  sorts,  de- 
livered to  the  person  concerned  or  indefinitely. 
Such  warnings  are  issued  in  the  Asinaria, 
Bacchides,  Curculio,  Miles,  Poenulus,  and  Pseu- 
dolus.^ 

Asinaria,  indefinite  and  spoken, 

vv.iiSf.     Non  esse  seruos  peior  hoc  quisquam 
potest 
Nee  magis  uorsutus  nee  quo  ab  caueas 
aegrius. 

Miles,  against  Sceledrus  and  spoken, 

vv,295f.     Nam    tibi    iam   ut    pereas    paratumst 
dupliciter,  nisi  supprimis 
Tuom  stultiloquium. 

Pseudolus,  indefinite  and  spoken, 

vv.i27f.     Omnibus  amicis  notisque  edico  meis. 
In  hunc  diem  a  me  ut   caueant,   ne 
credant  mihi. 

3  cf.  Terence:  Andrla,  v.206. 


I40        DECEPTION   IN   PLAUTUS 

against  Simo 

vv.5i7f.     Praedico,  ut  caeueas:  dico,  inquam,  ut 
caueas :  caue : 
Em  istis  mihi  tu  hodie  manibus  argen- 
tum  dabis. 

Bacchides,  to  Nicobolus,  by  a  letter,  vv.734ff. 

Poenulus,  to  Lycus  the  leno,  by  an  oracle, 

vv.463ff.     Condigne  haruspex,   non   homo   trio- 

boli. 
Omnibus  in  extis  aiebat  portendi  mihi 
Malum  damnumque  et  deos  esse  ira- 

tos  mihi. 

Curculio,  to  Cappadox  the  leno,  by  a  dream, 

vv.27off pacem  ab  Aesculapio 

Petas,  ne  forte  tibi  eueniat  magnum 
malum. 
Quod  in  quiete  tibi  portentumst. 

Dreams  also  foreshadow  coming  events  in  the 
Miles  as  well  as  in  the  Mercator  and  the  Rudens.* 
As  Leo  points  out,  the  presence  of  the  dream 
motive  in  the  plays  is  explained  on  very  much 
the  same  principle  as  that  of  the  anagnorisis,  in- 
asmuch as  it  is  a  feature  characteristic  of  tragedy 
as  well  as  of  New  Comedy.  It  may  be  combined 
with  the  anagnorisis,  then,  to  prove  a  connection 
between  Plautus  and  the  Greek. 

4  Leo;  Plaut.  Ponsch.  pp.l62ff. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      141 

(6)  Futility  of  trickery 

The  apparent  futility  of  some  of  the  tricks  and 
the  abandonment  of  them  for  others  is  character- 
istic of  some  of  the  plays,  as  the  Bacchides,  Epi- 
dicus,  Persa,  Miles,  Poenulus,  Pseudolus,  and  the 
Trinummus.  Such  abandonment  of  plans  is 
caused  either  by  some  act,  unanticipated  by  the 
audience,  on  the  part  of  one  of  the  characters,  as 
the  returning  of  all  the  money  by  Mnesilochus 
in  the  Bacchides,  or  the  arrival  of  the  father  in 
the  Trinummus ;  or  by  the  careless  uniting  of  two 
plots,  as  in  the  "contaminated"  plays,  the  Miles 
and  the  Poenulus.  This  has  been  considered  in 
the  discussion  of  contaminatio  in  the  various 
plays. 

(7)  Disappearance  of  characters 

As  this  has  been  discussed  at  some  length 
above^  it  need  merely  be  mentioned  here. 

From  this  summary  it  seems  evident,  there- 
fore, that  Plautus  had  a  stock  of  scenes  and  mo- 
tives on  hand  which  he  mingled  at  will  with  the 
plot  of  deception,  for  which  they  were  to  serve 
as  embellishment  and  expansion.  Or  the  reverse 
may  be  true,  that  deception  was  inserted  in  plays 
of  varying  situation  and  plot.  This  list  does  not 
pretend  to  be  exhaustive.  Only  the  more  un- 
usual details  have  been  selected  for  consideration. 

5  cf.  under  the  Persa,  In  m  B,  p.  116. 


142        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

A  collection  of  the  more  common  motives,  such 
as  scenes  including  cooks,  parasites  and  the  like, 
would  only  strengthen  the  deduction  drawn  from 
the  present  list. 

From  all  three  points  of  view  then, — methods, 
plan,  and  extraneous  detail, — a  study  of  the  tech- 
nique of  the  comedies  of  Plautus  leads  to  the 
conclusion  that  deception  was  the  chief  interest. 
Especially  throughout  the  analysis  of  the  plan 
and  action  involved  in  the  performance  of  the 
deception  I  have  endeavoured  in  each  play  to  in- 
dicate to  what  extent  Plautus  was  careful  to  at- 
tain unity  and  plausibility,  and  in  what  details 
he  apparently  considered  such  care  unnecessary. 
That  clearness  of  plot  was  gained,  as  has  been 
seen,  by  carefully  planned  and  executed  pur- 
pose, achieved  by  constant  repetition^  of  the  de- 
tails of  that  plan  and  by  asides^  on  the  part  of 
the  characters,  either  in  self-addressed  mono- 
logue, anticipating  or  commenting  upon  the  pro- 
gress of  the  deception,  or  in  dialogue  spurring 
each  other  on  to  carry  out  the  trick  in  hand.  As 
Legrand  says,*  Plautus  wished  everything  to  be 
clearly  understood  by  even  the  most  ignorant 
auditor. 

Details  unessential  to  the  plot  of  deception 
were  frequently  disregarded :  the  element  of 
time®  in  the  Bacchides,  Asinaria,  Captivi,  Casina, 

6  cf.    under   the   Pseudolus,    Miles   and   Menaechml,    In 

in  B. 

7  cf.  under  the  Captivi,  in  III  B,  pp.77ff. 

8  Daos:  p.547. 

»  cf.  under  the  Bacchides,  in  III  B.  p.66f. 


TECHNIQUE  OF  DECEPTION      143 

Curculio,  Miles,  Mostellaria;  haste  contradicted 
by  delay^°  for  mirth-provoking  wrangling  and 
argument  in  the  Asinaria,  Captivi,  Poenulus, 
Pseudolus,  Trinnmmus;  discrepancies  in  charac- 
terization in  the  Asinaria,  Curculio,  Epidicus, 
Mostellaria,  Persa,  Pseudolus;  the  apparent  ig- 
norance of  some  fact  important  for  the  progress 
of  the  action,  when  that  ignorance  adds  to  the 
comic  effect,  in  the  Asinaria,  Bacchides,  Captivi, 
Menaechmi,  Mercator,  Mostellaria,  Trinummus; 
ignorance  in  money  matters^^  or  contradictions 
in  the  price  demanded  in  the  Curculio,  Epidicus, 
Mercator,  Persa;  minor  details  of  action  which 
are  not  vital  to  the  main  course  of  the  trickery 
and  hence  are  unmotivated,  since  they  are  not 
used,^^  in  the  Asinaria,  Casina,  Curculio,  Epidi- 
cus, Miles,  Persa;  disappearance  of  characters^* 
in  the  Curculio,  Epidicus,  Mostellaria,  Persa, 
Pseudolus.  These  together  with  the  particular 
cases  of  "psychological  improbability"^^  noted 
under  each  play  and  with  the  contradictions  ap- 
pearing sporadically,  but  of  the  same  general  na- 
ture as  those  shared  in  common  with  several  of 
the  plays,  justify  our  conclusion  that  the  play- 
wright paid  little  heed  to  consistency  in  unessen- 
tial details. 


10  When  not  otherwise  indicated  the  details  summar- 
ized above  have  been  mentioned  in  each  play  as  they 
occurred. 

11  cf.  under  the  Curculio,  in  III  B,  p.88f. 

12  cf.  under  the  Casina,  in  III  B,  p.83f. 

13  cf.  under  the  Persa,  in  III  B,  p.ll6f. 

14  cf.  under  the  Asinaria,  in  III  B,  pp.74f. 


144        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

In  a  single  rendering  of  a  play  before  an  au- 
dience whose  only  desire  was  to  be  entertained, 
most  discrepancies  in  plot  would  pass  unnoticed. 
And  inasmuch  as  the  inconsistencies  in  no  in- 
stance affect  vitally  the  progress  of  the  trickery, 
it  is  all  the  more  important  that  we  bear  in  mind 
that  Plautus  wrote  his  plays  "to  make  a  Roman 
holiday"  and  not  to  bear  the  microscopic  analysis 
of  literary  criticism.  Under  such  circumstances 
we  might  expect  the  emphasis  to  be  laid  upon 
the  effect  rather  than  upon  the  method,  upon 
the  burlesque  details  rather  than  upon  the  tech- 
nique of  the  plot.  And  this  seems  to  be  the  case. 
With  the  attention  of  the  playwright  focussed 
upon  that  dramatic  effect,  lack  of  proportion  in 
other  details,  inconsistencies  and  the  like,  either 
escaped  the  notice  of  the  audience  or  were  con- 
sidered of  no  importance.  Whence  the  idea  for 
such  centralization  arose,  what  forces  combined 
to  shape  it, — i.  e.  the  sources  of  deception  in 
comedy, — and  how  far  the  present  form  of  the 
comedies  represents  the  original  Plautine  tradi- 
tion,— i.  e.  the  relation  of  the  plays  to  the  Greek 
models  and  especially  the  question  of  contamina- 
tio  and  of  retractatio, — remains  still  to  be  con- 
sidered. 


CHAPTER  IV 

Application  of  Facts  to  Higher  Criticism 
Contatninatio  and  Retractatio 

ONE  of  the  most  valuable  results  of  the  fore- 
going study  and  analysis  of  the  element  of 
deception  in  the  comedies  of  Plautus  may  be  at- 
tained by  the  application  of  the  conclusions 
drawn  to  the  difficulties  of  higher  criticism — i.  e. 
to  the  solution  of  problems  connected  with  con- 
taminatio  and  retractatio.  Inasmuch  as  con- 
taminatio  is  Plautine,  our  object  is  to  determine 
whether  Plautus'  method  is  essentially  different 
in  his  treatment  of  deception  in  the  "contaminat- 
ed" and  the  uncontaminated  plays  and  whether 
some  light  may  be  thrown  upon  the  plays  still  in 
doubt,  as  the  Bacchides,  Epidicus,  and  Pseudolus. 
In  other  words,  how  far  do  abnormalities  support 
or  refute  contaminatio  or  retractatio ;  for  some  of 
the  abnormalities  may  be  attributable  to  the  lat- 
ter. 

Retractatio  will  necessarily  claim  the  chief 
consideration  in  this  section;  for,  as  has  just  been 
noted,  contaminatio  is  Plautine,  and  because  of 
that  fact  has  already  been  discussed  in  the  fore- 
going study  of  the  dropped  threads,  inconsis- 
tencies and  the  like,  in  the  analysis  of  each  play.^ 
That  consideration  brought  us  to  the  conclusion 

1  cf.  under  section  lU  B. 


146        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

that  Plautus'  methods  were  haphazard  and  care- 
less in  the  treatment  of  unessential  details.  In- 
tent upon  the  plot  of  deception,  as  seems  quite 
clear  from  our  comparison  of  the  plays,  Plautus 
neglected  no  details  absolutely  indispensable  to 
an  understanding  of  that  plot  either  in  plan  or 
in  action.  Where  obscurity  is  apparent  in  the 
plot  of  deception,  as  in  the  Epidicus,  which  is  the 
only  play  in  which  obscurities  enter  to  such  a 
marked  degree,  it  has  seemed  justifiable,  in  view 
of  the  general  adherence  of  most  of  the  plays  to 
a  certain  norm,  to  consider  such  obscurity  as  due 
to  later  reworking  of  the  play, — i.  e.  to  retrac- 
tatio. 

Moreover,  the  analysis  of  the  comedies  has 
shown  a  great  deal  of  uniformity^  in  the  sort  of 
ambiguities  and  inconsistencies  which  occur  in 
both  the  contaminated  plays,  e.  g.  the  Miles  and 
the  Poenulus,  and  the  uncontaminated,  like  the 
Mostellaria  and  the  Trinummus.  Inasmuch  as 
the  same  sort  of  contradictions,  e.  g.  discrepan- 
cies in  character  portrayal,  motiveless  action, 
etc.,  occur  in  those  plays  still  sub  mdice,  like  the 
Bacchides,  it  is  clear  that  too  hasty  conclusions 
must  not  be  drawn  from  such  occurrences  as  a 
basis  for  proof  of  contaminatio.  This  "work  of 
the  Danaids",  as  Lindsay  styles  it,^  is  not  solved 
so  easily. 

Let  us  take  the  arguments  pro  and  con  for 
contaminatio  in  the  Bacchides  just  mentioned  as 

2  cf.  summary  of  section  III,  pp.l42ff. 

3  Bunslan's    Jahresberlcht,    Vol.    166-169,    1914,    Part    II 
p.18. 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  147 

an  illustration  of  the  difficulty  of  arriving  at  a 
decision  in  the  matter.  As  early  as  1842,  Lade- 
wig*  maintained  contaminatio  for  the  Bacchides, 
and  also  for  the  Captivi,  Miles,  Pseudolus,  Tru- 
culentus  and  less  positively  for  the  Stichus  and 
the  Trinummus.  Leo^  and  E.  Frankel^  held 
that  the  discrepancy  between  the  statement  in 
V.1090 — bis — and  the  existence  of  three  tricks  in 
the  Bacchides  is  due  to  contaminatio;  and  that 
the  second  letter  is  too  Attic  to  be  an  invention 
of  Plautus.  But  Leo  himself  grants  the  possi- 
bility, which  is  just  as  reasonable  a  solution  as 
contaminatio,  that  the  letter  may  be  merely  a 
repetition  of  the  first  one,  introduced  by  Plautus 
himself  in  his  desire  to  increase  the  comic  effect 
and  the  impression  of  Chrysalus'  cleverness  by  a 
more  complete  discomfiture  of  the  old  man  Nico- 
bulus.  And  Plautus,  while  using  the  Menan- 
drean  model,  forgot  at  the  end  that  he  had  in- 
corporated a  third  trick  and  merely  translated 
the  Greek  Sc'?''.  FrankeP  suggests  also  the 
possibility  of  retractatio  as  an  explanation  of  this 
contradiction ;  but  that  seems  hardly  probable, 
since  there  is  no  reason  for  it  in  this  play.  The 
double  trickery  would  suffice  for  the  comic  in- 
terest, which  it  was  usually  the  desire  of  the  re- 
tractatores  to  increase. 

4  ijber  den  Kanon  des  Volcatius  Sedigltus,  Neustrelltz, 
pp.27ff. 

5  R6m.  Lit.  pp.llOf. 

6  De  media  et  nova  comoedia  quaestlones,   Diss.  GQtt- 
ingen,   1912,   pp.lOOff. 

7  Leo:  Rom.  Lit.  p.ll9. 

8  Op.  clt. 


148        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

In  the  light  of  our  investigation  of  this  play 
and  our  consideration  of  its  inconsistencies,  it 
would  seem  justifiable  to  reject  the  explanation 
of  contaminatio  and  to  regard  the  Bacchides  as 
a  good  example  of  the  way  in  which  Plautus 
dealt  with  his  Greek  model,  adding  trickery  to 
that  already  present  and  carelessly  neglecting 
minor  details  of  connection,  or  allusion,  in  his 
emphasis  upon  the  main  theme  of  trickery. 

The  same  sort  of  addition  for  comic  effect,  as 
noted  in  the  Bacchides,  can  be  seen  in  the  Asi- 
naria,  in  the  new  condition  imposed  in  vv.735ff., 
which  was  not  included  in  the  original  bargain. 
Yet  if  it  were  not  in  the  Greek  original  no  one 
would  attribute  that  addition  to  anyone  but 
Plautus. 

The  connection  of  discrepancies  of  this  sort 
with  contaminatio,  and  the  rejection  or  accep- 
tance of  contaminatio  as  the  explanation  for 
them,  were  considered,  as  has  been  noted,  under 
the  analysis  of  the  separate  plays.^  A  few  gen- 
eral remarks  about  several  plays  in  regard  to 
this  question  may,  however,  still  be  made  here. 

The  Persa  may  be  classed  with  the  Asinaria; 
for  like  that  play  its  plot  combines  two  tricks, — 
the  appropriation  of  the  purchase  money  by  Sa- 
garistio  and  the  personation,  which  gives  the 
name  to  the  play.  Both  plays  likewise  end  in 
banquet  scenes,  like  the  Stichus,  though  in  the 
Persa  and  the  Asinaria  the  banquet  scenes  be- 
long logically  and  organically  to  the  play,^°  \vhile 

9  cf.  section,  III  B. 
10  Leo;   Plaut.  Forsch.   pp.l68f. 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  149 

in  the  Stichus  this  feature,  probably  derived  from 
the  l^oSot  of  the  Old  Comedy  is  dragged  in 
forcibly.  As  Leo  maintains  for  the  Stichus,  it  is 
probable  that  all  three  plays  illustrate  in  their 
structure  that  heterogeneous  combination  of  far- 
cical elements  from  various  sources  of  which 
Plautus  was  fond.  The  distinction  between  this 
combination  of  elements  and  the  fusion  of  plots 
which  has  come  to  have  the  technical  name  of 
contaminatio  should  be  borne  in  mind. 

The  theory  of  contaminatio  for  the  Persa  sug- 
gested by  Ladewig^^  and  maintained  by  A.  Van 
Ijsendyk"  has  not  been  accepted;  for  the  threads 
of  trickery  run  parallel  and  intermingle^^  in  a 
way  which  is  not  true  in  the  plays  like  the  Miles 
and  the  Poenulus,  which  are  surely  contaminated. 
As  to  the  shortening  of  the  play  especially  after 
Act  IV  scene  8,^*  and  the  absence  of  the  para- 
site from  the  banquet,  how  much  may  be  attri- 
buted to  Plautus  and  how  much  to  a  later  hand 
it  is  impossible  to  determine.  Both  branches  of 
the  manuscript  tradition,  A  and  P,^^  show  many 
traces,  however,  of  retractatio. 

Free  from  contaminatio  in  the  technical  sense 
are  the  Captivi^^  and  the  Curculio.  The  peculi- 
arity of  these  plays  lies  in  the  motiveless  action. 


11  Op.  cit.  pp.38ff. 

12  De  T.  Maccl  Plautl  Persa,  Utrecht,  1884. 

13  M.  Meyer:  De  Plautl  Persa,  pp.l67ff. 

14  Rltschl   ed.   1853,   Praef.,   p.IX. 

15  C.  Coulter:  Retractatio  in  Plautus,  Diss,  Bryn  Mawr, 
1911,  p.41. 

16  Coulter:  op.  clt.  p.5. 


I50        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

In  the  Captivi,  Hegio's  only  purpose  was  to  send 
some  captive  to  ransom  his  son.  From  this 
point  of  view,  to  be  sure,  the  master,  Philocrates, 
had  to  be  held  as  a  hostage ;  the  slave  was  worth- 
less for  this  purpose.  But  as  far  as  the  ex- 
igencies of  the  plot  are  concerned,  the  exchange 
of  roles  by  the  captives  is  unnecessary.^^  The 
reason  for  the  exchange  is  in  the  minds  of  the 
captives,  for  their  own  advantage;  but  as  the 
plot  develops  nothing  is  made  of  that  exchange. 
The  pathetic  interest  of  the  play  is  heightened, 
to  be  sure,  by  it,  and  one  overlooks  the  lack  of 
motive  in  the  interest  aroused  by  it.  In  other 
words  this  is  another  instance  of  Plautine  tech- 
nique in  the  disregard  of  unimportant  details  for 
the  sake  of  the  dramatic  interest. 

The  same  thing  is  true  of  the  Curculio,^®  inas- 
much as  from  the  soldier's  point  of  view  the  mo- 
tive of  his  disclosure  to  Curculio  is  nil.  But  for 
the  development  of  the  action,  as  has  been  noted 
above,^^  it  is  necessary,  because  the  trick 
whereby  Planesium  falls  into  Phaedromus'  pos- 
session rests  upon  it.  Likewise  the  appearance 
of  the  soldier  from  Caria  is  without  motive.  As 
Langen  suggests,2°  the  defects  may  be  due  to  re- 
tractatio.  But  the  play  is  essentially  Plautine  in 
nature  and  clear  in  spite  of  shortening.  The  dis- 
appearance of  Palinurus  from  the  play,  which 


17  Legrand:  Daos,  p.401  note  2. 
IS  Langen:  Plant.  Stud.  p.l34. 

19  cf.  section  III  B,  p.87. 

20  Op.    cit. 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  151 

Leo  notes,^^  after  the  return  of  Curculio,  is  due 
merely  to  the  fact  that  upon  the  trickster  and  his 
plans  the  action,  here,  as  in  other  plays,  focuses ; 
and  subordinate  characters,  as  we  have  pointed 
out  above,^^  disappear  when  their  contributions 
to  those  plans  have  been  made. 

The  Mostellaria  is  the  sort  of  play  wherein 
this  power  of  improvisation  on  the  part  of  Plau- 
tus,  or  his  model,  has  freest  rein,  inasmuch  as  all 
the  trickery  is  brought  about  by  sudden  unex- 
pected turns  of  chance,^^  and  plans  spring  from 
the  need  of  the  moment.  The  Trinummus,  which 
the  prologue  tells  us  is  translated  from  the 
Qr^aaupoq  of  Philemon,  vv.iSf.,  is  very  similar  to 
the  Mostellaria  in  its  freedom  from  difficulties 
involving  contaminatio,  as  far  as  the  plot  of  de- 
ception is  concerned. 

The  question  of  contaminatio  in  the  Miles, 
Poenulus,  and  Pseudolus  has  been  discussed  at 
some  length  under  the  separate  plays.^*  Scholars 
still  differ  as  to  the  reconstruction  of  the  original 
plots  which  served  as  their  models.  For  the 
Pseudolus  the  analysis  suggested  by  Bierma,^' 
modified  by  the  views  of  Seyffert,^^,  of  Leo,^^ 
and  of  A.  Schmitt,^^  is  the  prevailing  one  today. 

21  Plaut.  Porsch.  p.l97,   note  1. 

22  cf.  section  III  B.,  p.llG. 

23  Ritschl:  Opusc.  II,  p.740. 

24  cf.  section  III  B.,  pp.  109ff.;  llTflf.;  128ff. 

25  Questiones  de  Plautina  Pseudolo,  Groningen,  1897. 
26Berl.  Phil.  W^och.  18,  1898,  coll.  1511-1515. 

27  G.  G.  N.   1903,  pp.347ff. 

28  De  Pseudoli  Plautinae  exemplo  Attlco,  Strassburg, 
1909. 


152        DECEPTION   IN   PLAUTUS 

For  the  Poenulus  the  results  of  the  analysis  of 
Langen,^^  Leo,^°  and  Karsten^^  still  remain  un- 
changed. 

The  relation  of  the  Miles  to  its  originals  and 
all  the  work  done  upon  that  question  has  been 
summarized  by  J.  Mesk^^  who  accepts  in  general 
Leo's  analysis.^^  Aside  from  the  arguments  of- 
fered by  them  in  substantiation  of  contaminatio 
for  these  plays,  from  the  analyses  of  the  decep- 
tion which  we  have  made,  we  would  maintain  such 
contaminatio,  especially  for  the  Poenulus  and  the 
Miles  where  the  tricks  are  so  separate  and  dis- 
tinct, and  where  the  dropped  threads  indicate 
quite  evidently  the  combination  of  two  plots.  For 
the  Pseudolus  the  proof  is  not  conclusive. 

The  conclusion  in  regard  to  contaminatio  and 
its  reaction  upon  the  comedies  of  Plautus  is  now 
clear.  Discrepancies  and  irregularities  in  details 
are  not  abnormal  to  the:  method  of  Plautus  and 
can  therefore  not  serve  as  criteria  by  which  to 
test  the  plays  still  in  doubt.  The  analysis  of  the 
plays  with  the  motive  of  deception  as  the  central 
point  has  shown  this.  In  the  Miles  and  the 
Poenulus,  which  are  generally  regarded  as  "con- 
taminated", are  found  the  same  characteristics 
of  technique  as  in  the  Asinaria,  Curculio,  and 
Trinummus,  for  example.  In  all  the  plays  Plau- 
tus shows  the  same  pains  about  the  same  points, 

29  Plaut.  stud.  pp.lSlff. 

30  Plaut.  Forsch.  pp.l70ff. 

31  Mnem.   29,   1901,   pp.363fE. 

32  Wiener  Studien,  1913,  pp,211ff. 

33  Plaut.  Forsch.  pp.l78ff. 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  153 

i.  e.  he  keeps  the  fact  of  imposture  before  the 
audience^*  by  a  repetition  of  the  essential  details 
and  traces  clearly  the  course  of  the  trickery 
through  plan  and  execution;  and  the  playwright 
also  shows  the  same  carelessness  about  the  same 
points,  e.  g.  the  element  of  time,  the  disappear- 
ance of  certain  characters,  the  minor  psycholo- 
gical improbabilities,  and  the  like.^' 

Former  studies  have  emphasized  too  much  the 
separate,  individual  irregularities  of  each  sepa- 
rate play  and  have  focussed  their  attention  too 
exclusively  upon  the  separate,  individual  plays. 
The  relative  importance  of  those  irregularities 
can  only  be  seen  by  a  comparative  study  of  all 
the  plays.  From  such  a  study  it  seems  that  con- 
taminatio  must  be  based  upon  really  organic  dif- 
ficulties, e.  g.  lack  of  proper  motive,  as  in  the 
Miles  and  Poenulus,  for  a  second  trick,  and  not 
upon  crudities  of  technique  which  are  normal  in 
Plautus. 

In  other  words,  this  study  has  contributed  no 
new  points,  perhaps,  as  evidence  for  or  against 
contaminatio,  but  it  has  enabled  us  to  indicate 
the  relative  value  of  the  proofs  already  existent. 
That  valuation  has,  accordingly,  forced  us  to  re- 
ject some  of  the  discrepancies  advanced  as  proof 
of  contaminatio,  e.  g.  in  the  Pseudolus  especial- 
ly,^^ since  they  are  characteristically  Plautine  and 
can  be  explained  on  more  rational  grounds  than 
by  resorting  to  contaminatio.       That  being  the 

84  cf.  section  III  B.  passim,  especially  pp.l27f. 

35  Ibid. 

se  cf.  section  III  B.  pp.lSOff. 


154        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

case,  it  remains  still  to  discover  the  source  of  the 
abnormalities  which  are  un-Plautine.  In  other 
words,  are  they  due  to  retractaio? 

As  to  retractatio,  which  is  the  result  of  the 
need  of  later  presenters  of  the  Plautine  plays^^ 
to  accommodate  the  play  to  the  trend  of  mind 
of  a  new  and  later  audience,  the  decision  be- 
tween genuine  and  ungenuine  passages  depends 
largely  upon  the  subjective  estimate  of  the  cri- 
tic.^* Hence  the  difficulty  of  arriving  at  a  defi- 
nite conclusion  is  merely  increased.  For  that 
purpose  an  examination  of  passages  which  are 
suspected  of  being  "retractated"  is  necessary  to 
determine  what  sort  of  passages  suffer  general- 
ly at  the  hands  of  the  retractator.  But  it  is  not 
necessary  to  determine  whether  they  are  justifi- 
ably suspected.  In  other  words  from  the  point 
of  view  of  trickery  as  the  chief  interest  in  the 
comedies,  an  examination  of  the  passages  re- 
garded as  "retractated"  will  suffice  to  show 
whether  essential  or  only  minor  details  connect- 
ed with  deception  suffered  at  the  hands  of  the 
later  emendators  of  the  Plautine  text.^^ 

The  basis  of  any  work  in  this  connection  is 
Langen's  Plautinische  Studien,  section  III 
pp.233-387,  a  good  summary  of  work  before 
1886,  with  which  are  compared  the  readings  in 
the  editions  of  Leo,  Goetz-Schoell  and  Lindsay 

37  H.  A.  Karsten:  De  Interpolationibus  in  Plautl  Cap- 
tlvls,  Mnem.  XXI,  1893,  p.289. 

38  Langen:  Plaut.  Stud,  p.233. 

89  The  problems  connected  with  the  lacunae  are  not  in- 
cluded in  this  discussion. 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  155 

and  the  contributions  made  by  later  monographs 
to  our  investigation.  Here  again  the  Bacchides 
is  taken  as  a  starting-point. 

V.233  is  a  good  illustration  of  the  sort  of  verse 
affected  by  retractatio.  Anspach*"  considers  it  a 
case  of  dittography  of  v.232;  but  Langen  disa- 
grees and  holds  it  as  presenting  an  additional 
and  an  essential  idea.  As  has  been  said,  how- 
ever, our  purpose  is  not  to  come  to  any  decision 
between  such  conflicting  authorities  but  merely 
to  note  the  lines  thus  suspected  and  to  examine 
their  contents  to  see  whether  in  any  way  they  are 
connected  with  the  plot  of  deception.*^ 

Special  note  should  be  made  of  Act  II  3  in 
which  two  themes  are  apparently  interwoven, — ■ 
the  depositing  of  the  money  in  the  temple  of 
Diana,  and  the  depositing  of  it  with  a  friend. 
But  the  editors  differ  as  to  the  attribution  of  the 
verses  to  Plautus.  Even  so,  the  passage  has  no 
connection  with  the  plot  of  deception  except  in 
so  far  as  the  tale  told  is  to  convince  the  old  man 
that  the  money  was  not  brought  home,  and  either 
or  both  tales  might  have  convinced  him.  Like- 
wise a  large  part  of  Act  III  2  was  suspected  by 
Ritschl  following  K.  W.  Weise,  cf.  vv.393  and 
403  which  contain  similar  endings.       Leo  and 

40  De  Bacchidum  Plautlnae  retractatlone  scaenicae 
Bonn.  1882. 

41  Lines  considered  by  Langen  which  contain  no  refer- 
ence to  deception:  w.l21ff.,  150,  152f.,  159f.,  220f.,  361ff., 
366f.,  3378-382,  479,  486ff.,  508,  984fC.,  1120-1142,  1188ff.; 
division  of  Act  I  1,  cf.  also  Leo,  for  w.67  and  69,  follow- 
ing Ribbeck  and  Buecheler. 


156        DECEPTION   IN    PLAUTUS 

Ussing  (editions)  apparently  regard  the  whole  as 
Plautine.  But  the  scene  has  no  immediate  con- 
nection with  the  trickery. 

The  same  is  true  of  Act  IV  9  and  the  suspect- 
ed verses  in  it,  a  sign  of  retractatio,  or  the  two 
recensions  in  Act  IV  8,  vv.842-883  and  w.884- 
901.  Langen's  theory  in  this  scene  particularly 
is  contradicted  successfully  by  H.  Weber.*^  But 
it  is  evident  that  the  main  details  of  the  plot  have 
been  left  untouched  by  the  retractator.  It  is  ap- 
parently such  sententious  moralizing,  as  in  Act 
III  2,  or  such  expansions  of  the  thought  of  pre- 
ceding lines,  as  vv.i59f.,  of  hie  uereri  perdidit, 
that  indicate  most  frequently  the  hand  of  the 
amender.  An  examination  of  more  of  the  plays 
must,  however,  precede  any  conclusions  as  to 
this  point. 

Amphitruo 

In  the  Amphitruo  contradictory 
lines  are  found  by  Langen,  Goetz  and  Leo.  But 
an  examination  of  all  the  lines  discussed  by 
them*^  reveals  no  connection  with  the  trickery. 

Asinaria 

In  the  Asinaria,  at  the  end  of  Act 
I  I,  occurs  a  double  recension  which  is  connect- 

42  Plautus  Studien,   Phllol.  57,   1898,   pp.231fr. 

43VV.401,  479-485,  629fE.;  dittogrrapliies  In,  vv.371-375. 
825ft.,  916f.,  1006ff.  parallel  to  w.997fE.;  interpolations  in 
VV.160.  166.  685,  974f.,  suspected  lines  in  w.l72,  892-896. 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  157 

ed  with  the  trickery.  Goetz-Loewe**  had  indi- 
cated VV.106,  107,  108,  1 16-125,  109-116  as  one 
recension,  vv.106-115  as  the  other,  because  of 
V.108,  ego  eo  ad  forum  which  apparently  would 
exclude  such  a  question  as  ubi  erisf  in  v.iio. 
For  the  success  of  the  plan  of  deception  it  is  es- 
sential that  Demaenetus  should  know  where  Li- 
banus  will  be,  but  ad  forum  Langen  holds  to  be 
sufficient  direction.  Should  further  direction  be 
needed,  as  Langen  concedes  possible,  still  Li- 
banus'  answer  to  the  query,  ubiquomque  lubitum 
erit  animo  appears  to  Langen  entirely  irrelevant 
and  he  would  accordingly  consider  vv.109-110 
as  later  interpolations.  But  such  literal-minded- 
ness  often  leads  the  German  scholar  into  error. 
It  is  just  as  probable  that  the  playwright  himself 
conceived  of  the  impudent  answer  of  the  slave 
for  comic  effect  as  that  it  should  have  been  in- 
vented by  a  later  retractator.  So  the  point  is  not 
conclusive. 

Of  the  other  lines  questioned  by  Langen,*^ 
V.93  is  not  essential  to  the  course  of  the  trickery, 
since  its  question,  Defrudem  te  ego?  is  repeated 
in  the  following  line.  So  it  is  quite  evidently 
the  work  of  a  retractator  and  its  omission  in  no 
way  affects  the  plot,  v.252  in  like  manner  mere- 
ly repeats  v.250.  vv.480-483  and  489ff.  give  a 
double  recension  of  the  end  of  Act  II  4,  the  im- 

44Praef.  p.XXII  cf.  Langen:  Plaut.  Stud.  p.240. 

45  vv.23f..  25f.,  33,  66,  77,  93,  in,  204ff.,  252,  312-314; 
434f.,  480-483,  489ff.,  552,  583,  828f,  901ff.;  for  double  ending 
of  Act  n  4  cf.  Goetz:  Praef.  XXIII;  L«angen:  op.  clt. 
p.243f.;  P.  Ahrens:  De  Plauti  Aslnaria,  Jena,  1903. 


158        DECEPTION   IN    PLAUTUS 

postor  scene,  but  without  aflfecting  the  course  of 
the  trickery,  v. 583  merely  repeats  v.581  and  is 
not  essential.  So  again  the  scope  of  the  work  of 
the  retractator  is  found  outside  the  important 
parts  of  the  play. 

Captivi. 

The  same  thing  holds  true  for  the 
Captivi.  Contradictions  occur/^,  interpola- 
tions,*^ dittographies,*^  a  double  ending,*^  verses 
suspected  for  other  reasons.''"  But  none  of  the 
verses  cited  affect  the  progress  of  the  deception 
and  hence  need  no  separate  comment. 

Casina 

Although  it  is  certain  that  the  Casina 
was  acted  after  the  death  of  Plautus,^^  it  shows 
fewer  interpolations  than  the  other  plays  and  ap- 
parently suffered  more  through  cutting  than 
through  expansion.^^  Langen  defends  v,203 
against  Spengel's  suggestion  that  it  is  a  repetition 
of  V.208.  He  also  defends  v.498  against  Loewe's 


46  cf.  H.  T.  Karsten:  op.  cit.  p.294. 

47VV.46-51,  102-107,  152,  231ff.,  288,  401ff.,   530-532,  664ff. 

48  VV.438,  cf.  Brix:  Anjiang;  Karsten;  521;  1022; 

49  cf.  Terence:  Andria,  L.  Havet:  frev.  de  Phil.  16,  1892, 
p.  73. 

50V.133-175,   cf.   Karsten:   op.   cit.;   vv.280,   324,   968,   cf. 
Leo  and  O.   Seyffert:  B.  Ph.  4,  1887,  p.780f. 
51  Langen:  op.  cit.  pp.278ff. 
62  Teuffel:  Stud.  u.   Char.   p.320. 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  159 

rejection  of  it,^^  as  a  gloss;  and  vv.688ff.,  against 
C.  Fuhrmann's  rejection.®*  Leo  holds  v.970  as 
a  contradiction  of  v.971.  But  here  again  none 
of  the  verses  in  question  touch  the  plot  of  decep- 
tion. If  the  retractatores  cut  this  play,  they  did 
not  produce  obscurities.^® 

Curculio  The  suspected  passages  of  the  Cur- 
culio  are  discussed  by  Langrehr.®^  The  only  one 
that  is  connected  with  the  trickery  is  VV.545-5S1, 
and  O.  Seyffert®^  defends  those  lines  on  the  basis 
that  they  anticipate  v.582.  They  are  not  really 
essential  to  the  plot,  so  their  acceptance  or  re- 
jection is  not  important;  suffice  it  to  note  that 
they  are  connected  with  the  plot  of  deception. 

Epidicus  In  the  Epidicus  the  interchange  of 
verses  in  Act  I  i  which  Langen®^  and  Hasper®* 
hold  against  Schredinger®°  does  not  affect  the 
trickery.  Again  it  is  a  case  of  authorities  dif- 
fering as  to  their  estimate  of  what  is  genuine 
and  what  is  un-Plautine.  The  same  is  true  of 
vv.46ff .  That  the  revelation  contained  therein  is 
contradicted  by  v.6o®^  is  hardly  the  case,  since 

53  Anal.  Plaut.  p.204. 

54jahrb.  f.  Philol.  97,  1869,  p.482. 

65  A.  L.  Wheeler:  Epidicus,  op.  cit. 

56  De  Plauti  Curculione,  Friedland,  1893;  w.l7,  61,  76, 
72,  93,  155-157,  161,  175,  193f..  200,  276,  284.  292,  305,  429, 
461,  472,   493,   503,   545-551,   678,   705,   711. 

57  Bursian's  Jahresbericht,   1895,   Part  II.   p.27. 

58  Op.   cit.  pp.288ff. 

59  Ad  Epidlcum  Plauti  oonlectanea,  p.9. 

60  De  Plauti  Bpidlco,  Progr,  Milnnerstadt,  1884,  p.  21. 

61  Ussing,  Hasper,  and  Reinliardt  in  Jalxrb.  f.  PWiol. 
Ill,  1875,  p.199. 


i6o        DECEPTION   IN   PLAUTUS 

such  pretended  reticence  after  such  open  speech 
is  psychologically  in  keeping  with  a  slave's  atti- 
tude.    Leo  and  Goetz-Schoell  retain  them. 

VV.109-111,  since  they  are  lacking  in  the  Am- 
brosian  palimpsest  may  be  an  interpolation. 
Moreover,  they  are  just  the  sort  of  sententious 
moralizing  added  by  later  reworkers  of  the  plays 
which  we  have  commented  upon  before.  But 
for  our  consideration  they  are  not  important. 
Likewise  unimportant  are  the  other  suspected 
verses.®^ 

Menaechmi 

The  Menaechmi  presents  no  sus- 
pected lines  connected  with  the  trickery.*^ 

Mercator 

As  to  the  reworking  of  this  play  by 
later  hands,  especially  the  prologue,  cf.  Ussing** 
who  cites  the  opinion  of  Ritschl,  of  Dziatzko,®' 
of  Reinhardt.*®  Proof  of  such  reworking  is 
possible  from  the  text,  as  these  scholars  have 


62VV.50,  135f.,  261-266,  339f.,  353,  384,  393,  419,  518fE. 

63  w.77f.,  130,  185ff.,  Act  n  2  passim,  478,  586f..  601,  639a. 
655f.,  694f.,  750,  831f.,  882fE.,  983f.,  1040,  cf.  Soixnenburg: 
de  Menaechmis  Plautlna,  Bonn,  1882;  Langren:  op.  clt. 
pp.296ff. 

64  Comment,   p.314. 

65  Rh.  M.  XXVI  p.  421;  XXIX  p.63. 

66  Studemund's  Studien  I  pp.SOff. 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  i6i 

indicated.     But  it  has  in  no  wise  affected  the 
simple  trend  of  the  trickery .^^ 

Miles. 

Retraciatio  in  the  Miles  has  been 
discussed  by  Lorenz,^^  by  F.  Schmidt^^  by 
Langen/°  by  O.  Ribbeck,"  and  by  Brix." 
Apart  from  the  lines  rejected  by  Leo^^  and  by 
Goetz-Schoeir*  and  by  Langen/'  only  Langen's 
rejection  of  Act  III  i  needs  consideration  here. 
Langen  thinks  that  the  whole  scene  could  be 
dispensed  with,  since  Act  III  3  contains  all  the 
information  necessary  for  understanding  the 
second  trick,  and  since  the  irrelevancy  of  vv.615- 
765  cast  suspicion  upon  the  whole  scene.  F. 
Schmidf*  solved  the  difficulty  by  rejecting  merely 
those  lines,  which  is  probably  the  saner  proce- 
dure. Plautus  is  often  irrelevant,  but  in  no  place 
does  he  carry  it  so  far  with  so  little  reason. 
Moreover,  the  passage  examined  on  stylistic 
grounds  is  not  Plautine,  so  Langen  holds.    Leo^^ 

67  cf.  W.126,  145ff..  150-165.  182,  185,  276,  220fr.,  263, 
269f.,  356,  373ff.,  419f.,  448a,  492ff.,  536,  555b,  620ff.,  746; 
849,  983a. 

68  Introd.  ed.  pp.36fE. 

69Jahrb.  f.   Phllol.   Suppl.  DC,   1877-78,  pp.391fl. 
ro  Op.  clt.  pp.313-333. 

71  Alazon,  1882. 

72  Introd.  ed.  pp.l4f. 
73VV.585,  602f.,  708,  710. 

74  w.l89a-192,  228,  328ff.,  699b,  1002.  1287ff. 

75  vv.1019-1033. 

76  Op.    cit. 

77  Plaut.  Forsoh.  p.l81. 


i62        DECEPTION   IN    PLAUTUS 

does  not  agree.  Langen  also  holds  that  the  con- 
trast between  the  praise  of  the  easy-going  life  of 
the  egoistic  youth  and  the  faithful  performance 
of  duty  on  the  part  of  a  loyal,  steady  citizen  is 
not  a  theme  which  would  appeal  to  a  Roman 
audience  of  Plautus'  time.  It  would,  however, 
he  thinks,  suit  the  taste  of  an  audience  of  the  time 
of  the  Plautine  revival.  Hence  it  is  retractated. 
But  the  poof  is  not  convincing. 

If  a  scene  prefatory  to  Pleusicles'  adoption  of 
the  role  of  nauclerus  in  vv.iiyyff.  is  required, 
Langen  would  place  it  somewhere  between  Acts 
II  and  III.  J.  Franke''*  maintains  the  Plautinity 
of  Act  III  I. 

But  this  must  remain  an  open  question ;  nor  is 
it  essential  to  our  purpose  to  decide  it,  since  the 
rejection  or  the  acceptance  of  the  whole  scene  or 
of  parts  of  it  does  not  in  any  way  affect  the 
course  of  the  deception,  i.  e.  even  though  there 
are  several  deceptions  which  are  not  well  con- 
nected, the  presentation  of  each  is  free  from  ob- 
scurities. 

Mostellaria 

None  of  the  suspected  verses  of  the  Mostel- 
laria needs  special  comment.''® 

78  De  Militis  Gloriosl  Plautlnae  composltone,  Weldae 
Thurlngll,   1910,  pp.48fE. 

79w.87f.,  93f.,  126f..  185,  208fr.,  306f.,  410,  609,  721a,  741, 
1001,  1033ff. 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  163 

Persa 

The  Persa  offers  slight  evidence  for  assuming 
that  the  play  suffered  change.^"  The  verses  which 
are  noted^^  with  minor  variations  do  not  affect 
the  trickery.  The  shortening  of  the  play  in  Act 
IV  9  was  probably  due  to  retractatio,^^  as  is  the 
case  with  the  Poenulus,  but  to  what  extent  the 
play  has  suffered  it  is  impossible  to  determine. 

Poenulus 

The  Poenulus  shows  more  alteration  than  any 
play  of  Plautus.  The  double  ending  is  the  long- 
est case  of  dittography^^  which  we  have.  It  con- 
tains parallel  versions,**  variant  lines,®^  longer 
alternate  versions.*^  But  none  of  these  influence 
the  course  of  deception,  nor  do  the  other  lines 
that  have  been  suspected.*^ 

Pseudolus 

The  same  is  true  of  the  Pseudolus.** 


80  Coulter:  op.  cit.  p.40. 

81W.433-436,    442f..   605,   608,    609f.,   703,   704. 

82Ritschl:  Praef.  p.IX. 

83  Coulter:  op.  cit.  p. 65. 

84vv.504fE.,   1315ff. 

85VV.214,  218,  304,  390b. 

86  vv.121-128,  917-929,  1042-1052. 

87  Coulter:  op.   cit.  p.66  note  28. 

88  cf.  w.523b,  688£f.,  1137;  certain  cases  of  retractatio, 
cf.  Coulter:  op.  cit.  p.81:— vv.l42,  151,  166,  206f.,  259-263, 
412,  535ff.,  544a.  562ff.,  576fr.,  596ab,  600,  696ab;  745-750 
parallel  to  734-744,  842,  1077,  1086,  1196,  1279f.,  1314. 


i64       DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 
Trinummus 

The  Trinummus  is  especially  good  as  an  illus- 
tration of  the  general  work  of  9ie  retractator,^^ 
since  the  play  is  so  full  of  sententiae  and  moral 
reflections,  upon  which  the  retractatores  are  par- 
ticularly inclined  to  exert  their  efforts.  The  play 
also  from  vv.582,  889-891,  901,  and  i093ff.,  has 
apparently  been  shortened.®" 

This  study  of  the  suspected  passages  of  the 
comedies  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  to  retrac- 
tatio  are  due  changes  in  unimportant  details,  i.  e. 
the  shortening  or  omission  of  unessential  speeches 
and  scenes,  or  such  a  second  ending  as  that 
offered  for  the  Poenulus.  But  the  hand  of  the 
retractaior  has  apparently  spared,  almost  entirely, 
the  details  which  are  essential  to  the  plot  of  de- 
ception. In  fact,  this  study  but  strengthens  the 
theory  already  expressed,  that  Plautus  worked 
for  comic  effect  and,  so  long  as  the  result  was 
superficially  successful,  considerations  of  struc- 
tural roughness  and  incompleteness  were  of 
minor  importance.  To  that  end  the  poet  com- 
bined at  will  either  details  from  various  sources, 
for  one  single  plan  of  action,  as  in  the  Asinaria 
and  the  Persa,  or  various  plans  of  action  for  the 
complex  plots  of  the  Miles  and  the  Poenulus; 
and  the  resulting  product  served  his  purpose  of 


89  Coulter:  op.  cit.  p.l07. 

90  For  other  suspected  lines  cf.  Coulter:  op.  cit.  p.l07, 
pote  19, 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  165 

entertaining  an  audience  uncritical  and  unobserv- 
ant of  the  many  superficial  discrepancies  which 
only  the  critical  analysis  of  a  scholar  would  seize 
upon. 

The  Epidicus  alone  seems  to  stand  out  as  dif- 
ferent from  the  other  plays,  both  in  the  nature  of 
some  of  the  threads  of  deception  which  are  drop- 
ped and  in  the  general  obscurity  and  looseness 
of  connection  in  the  plot  as  it  develops.  Lade  wig 
was  the  first^^  to  discuss  the  difficulties  in  the  play 
and  to  attribute  them  to  contaminatio.  Rein- 
hardt,  in  1873,^^  overthrew  that  possibility  and 
attributed  the  mutilation  of  the  play  to  the  hands 
of  the  later  actors  who  desired,  perhaps,  to  hasten 
the  denouement  and  to  meet  the  public  wish  for  a 
speedy  conclusion  to  the  play  after  the  climax. 
Langen  in  1886,®^  as  Schredinger^*  and 
Francken^^  before  him,  attributed  the  discrepan- 
cies to  retractatio.  The  brevity  of  the  play  is  a 
strong  point  for  such  an  argument;  for  the 
Epidicus,  as  has  been  noted  before,  is  apparently 
stripped  of  most  of  those  scenes  unessential  to 
the  plot  and  introduced  merely  for  comic  effect 
which  are  found  in  the  other  plays. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  change  in  the  ending, 
as  was  pointed  out  by  Dziatzko,""  necessitated  by 

91  Zeit.  f.  alt.  wiss.  1841,  coll.  1079-1099. 

92  Studemund's  Studien  I  pp.79-111. 
98  Plaut.  Stud.  pp.l37ff. 

94  Observatlones  In  Plautl  Epidicum,  Progr,  1884. 

95  Plautina  In  Mnem.  VII,  1879,  pp.184-204. 

96Der  Inhalt  des  Georgos  von  Menander,  Rh.  M.  LV, 
1900,  pp.l04ff. 


i66        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

the  Roman  repugnance  to  the  conclusion  of  the 
Greek  original,  involved  certain  confusion,  even 
though  Plautus,  by  substituting  a  reconciliation 
of  the  conflicting  interests  by  Epidicus  and  by 
centering  the  interest  on  him  and  his  plots,  en- 
deavours to  turn  the  attention  of  the  audience 
away  from  the  inconsistencies.  Leo,  while  hold- 
ing to  the  internal  unity  of  the  play,^^  assumes 
the  loss  of  a  prologue  containing  an  outline  of 
the  argument,  which  could  fill  in  such  gaps  in  the 
plot  as  need  explanation. 

How  far  the  playwright's  effort  to  reconcile 
these  difficulties  has  affected  the  play  and  how  far 
it  has  suffered  from  later  reworkings  it  is  impos- 
sible at  present  to  decide.  As  has  been  noted 
above,  the  study  of  the  other  plays  has  led  to  the 
conclusion  that  non-essentials  alone  were  con- 
cerned in  the  processes  of  the  retractotores.  If 
that  conclusion  be  accepted,  in  view  of  the  dif- 
ficulties presented  by  the  Epidicus,  it  is  clear  that 
both  carelessness  on  the  part  of  Plautus  and  re- 
working by  later  hands  have  caused  the  present 
obscurities  and  irregularities  in  the  Epidicus. 
That  retractatio  has  wrought  greater  disorder  in 
it  than  even  the  most  careless  of  Plautus'  own 
methods  of  composition  seems  evident  from  a 
comparison  of  the  outline  of  the  Epidicus  with 
those  of  the  other  plays. 

From  this  study  of  the  influence  of  contamina- 
tio  and  retractatio  upon  the  comedies  of  Plautus 
the  conclusion  in  regard  to  the  technique  of  Plau- 
tus is  only  strengthened.  "Intent  upon  the  mo- 
97  Plaut.  Forsch.  p.l98,  especially  note  2. 


APPLICATION  OF  FACTS  167 

mentary  comic  effect  and  centralizing  all  the  ac- 
tion in  that,  the  playwright  has  neglected  at  will 
the  finely  spun  threads  of  the  action,  especially 
where  he  'contaminated'  several  plays.  The  Miles 
and  the  Poenulus  on  one  side,  the  Casina  and 
Stichus  on  the  other,  compared  with  the  closely 
unified"*  plot  of  the  vea,  are  atrocities,  from  the 
point  of  view  of  a  careful  reader,  of  lack  of  or- 
der. Seldom  does  the  poet  develop  an  action  so 
logically  and  closely  as  in  the  Bacchides  and  the 
Mostellaria."®^  But  the  thread  of  deception  is,  in 
all  cases  except  the  Epidicus,  clear  and  distinct. 
Hence,  too,  the  deduction  that  the  work  of  the 
retract  at  or  seems  to  have  been  concerned  with 
extraneous  details  only. 

This  study  must,  however,  leave  us  still  of  the 
opinion  of  Leo^°°  that  in  view  of  the  fact  that 
we  possess  only  a  portion  of  the  works  of  Plau- 
tus  and  yet  from  these  can  see  how  he  sought  to 
please  the  taste  of  his  public  and  indiscriminately 
remodelled  plays  of  such  entirely  different  spirit 
as  the  Amphitruo  and  Asinaria,  the  Captivi  and 
Persa,  it  is  impossible  to  say  with  certainty  how 
much  of  the  elaboration  of  the  plots  is  Plautine, 
how  much  of  the  shortening  is  un-Plautine.  What 
Plautus  owed  in  the  technique  of  deception  to  his 
Greek  predecessors  is  still  to  be  considered. 

08  cf.  H.  W.  Prescott:  The  Interpretation  of  Roman 
Comedy,  Class.  Phil.  XI,  No.  2,  1916,  pp.l28fE.  for  an 
opposite  view. 

99  B.  Norden:  Die  rSmlsche  Literatur,  In  Einleltung  in 
die  Altertumswlssenschaft,  Vol.  I,  1910,  p.463. 

100  Plaut.  Forsch.  pp.l67f. 


CHAPTER  V 

Sources  of  the  Element  of  Deception 

ALTHOUGH  no  complete  comedy  of  the 
Greek  vsa  is  extant  to  serve  as  a  criterion, 
Plautus  and  Terence,  so  far  as  they  are  Greek, 
have  been  generally  acknowledged  as  handing 
down  the  tradition  of  the  New  Comedy.  When- 
ever we  know  who  was  the  author  of  a  Greek 
original  (or  what  w^as  the  title)  the  evidence  in 
every  case  except  the  Persa  points  to  the  vsa.  That 
Plautus  borrowed  also  from  Old  Comedy  is  pos- 
sible, as  he  surely  did  from  Middle  Comedy,  e.  g. 
the  Persa.^  To  what  extent  he  did  so  needs,  how- 
ever, further  investigation.  But  the  relation  be- 
tween the  Roman  and  the  Greek  and  their  con- 
nection with  antecedent  comedy  are  difficult  to 
establish  directly  because  of  the  fragmentary  re- 
mains of  Hellenistic  comedy.  An  effort  has  been 
made  in  the  present  chapter  to  throw  some  light 
upon  this  relation  by  tracing  through  the  Greek 
drama  an  outline,  at  least,  of  deception. 

As  has  been  seen  from  the  foregoing  analysis, 
the  methods  of  Plautus  in  developing  the  plot  of 

1 V.  Wllamowitz's  view  of  the  Persa :  De  trlbus  car- 
mlnlbus  Latlnls,  Index  Lect.  Gott.  1893-4,  pp.l3f.;  H.  W. 
Prescott:  The  Interpretation  of  Roman  Comedy,  Class. 
Phil.  XI  No.  2,  April  1916.  pp.125-147;  XII  No.  4,  Oct. 
1917,  pp.405-425. 

i68 


SOURCES   OF   DECEPTION        169 

deception,  which  is  the  centre  of  interest  in  the 
comedies,  although  at  times  haphazard,  seem  in 
general  well  ordered  and  painstaking,  with  due 
care  as  to  the  explanation  of  preceding  and  the 
preparation  for  subsequent  action.  The  former 
method  approaches  that  of  Aristophanes,^  in 
whom  there  is  little  or  nothing  of  explanation  or 
preparation,  with  slight  connection  between  the 
successive  scenes.  The  prologues  of  the  plays 
of  Aristophanes,  as  Croiset  points  out,^  contain 
the  germ  of  the  drama  which  is  developed  step  by 
step  throughout  the  comedy.  The  action  which  is 
organized  thus  in  the  prologue  is  extended  in  the 
first  part  of  the  play,  e.  g.  in  the  Achamians ;  and 
in  the  second  part  the  result  of  that  action  is 
shown  in  a  simple  succession  of  incidents  like  the 
scenes  of  the  primitive  comedy.  The  situations 
unravel  themselves,  with  the  denouement  fore- 
seen perhaps,  but  uncertain,  somewhat  like  the 
gradual  unexpected  development  of  the  plot  of 
the  Mostellaria.  This  laxer  construction  in  plot 
is  but  a  reflection  of  the  difference  between  the 
carefully  stated  outlines  of  the  play  given  in  the 
prologues  of  Euripides  and  the  summary  state- 
ment of  the  theme  in  the  prologues  of  Aristo- 
phanes just  noted. 

But  there  are  more  specific  points  of  resem- 
blance than  this  between  Aristophanes  and  Plau- 
tus.     The  types  of  characters  already  established 

2M.  Croiset:  Hlstoire  de  la  Litt^rature  Grecque,  Vol.  III. 
pp.552f. 
3  Op.  cit.  p.557. 


I70        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

in  the  comedy  of  Aristophanes,*  old  men  and 
women,  slaves  like  Carlo  in  the  Plautus,  and  the 
ending  of  some  of  the  plays  in  a  revel,  as  the 
Acharnians  and  the  Lysistrata,  the  Persa  and 
the  Asinaria,  show  the  possibly  indirect  influence 
of  the  Old  Comedy  upon  Plautus.^ 

Impossibilities  were  also  a  characteristic  of 
Attic  Old  Comedy,^  illustrated  in  the  Lysistrata 
by  the  gathering  together  of  women  from  hostile 
cities,  friends  and  enemies  alike,  in  the  assembly 
convoked  by  Lysistrata.  Plautus'  disregard  for 
verisimilitude  has  been  noted/ 

Lies,  to  be  sure,  are  a  feature  of  all  comedy. 
Aristophanes  realized  the  possibilities  of  amuse- 
ment in  lies  when  he  presented  them  so  aptly 
in  his  satire  on  the  Sophists  in  the  Clouds.*  Lies 
are,  of  course,  the  basis  of  all  deception.  But 
personation,  which  is  the  chief  element  of  decep- 
tion in  Plautus,  appears  also  in  Aristophanes.  In 
the  Frogs,  Dionysus  masquerades  as  Heracles 
vv.464flF.,  with  Xanthias  as  a  slave;  in  vv.498ff., 
they  exchange  roles;  in  v.742  the  slave  passes 
himself  off  as  the  master.  In  the  Plutus,  Carlo 
the  slave,  threatens  to  play  the  part  of  Cyclops, 


4  A.  Couat:  Aristophane  et  I'Ancienne  Com6die  AttiQue. 
Paris,  1892,  pp.367ff.;  Leo:  R8m.  Lit.  p.l06. 

5  Leo:  Plaut.  Forsch.  pp.l37ff. 

6  Rogers:   ed.   Lysistrata,   Introd.  p.XLL 

7  cf.  Section  III  B,  pp.72ff. 

8  Passim.  Pheidippides  illustrates  the  supposed  lying 
methods  of  the  Sophists  by  beating  his  father  and  then 
justifying  his  own  conduct,  cf.  Knights,  w.7,  64,  486,  491, 
696. 


SOURCES   OF   DECEPTION        171 

v.29oflf.,  and  then  that  of  Circe,  vv.30iff.,  and 
change  the  chorus  into  pigs.  In  the  Acharnians, 
the  Megarian  disguises  his  daughters  as  pigs, 
vv.739ff.  In  the  same  play  DicaeopoUs  plays  the 
role  of  a  beggar  to  carry  out  his  plan, 

V.445     .   ,   .  XsTCTQ!  [xtj^ava  9pevi 

The  Ecclesiazusae  opens  with  the  women  dis- 
guised as  men  practising  the  parts  which  they  are 
soon  to  play  in  the  Assembly,  and  the  whole  plot 
rests  upon  their  impersonation. 

But  the  Thesmophoriazusae  has  the  most 
points  in  common  with  the  plots  of  Plautus.  The 
whole  plot  rests  upon  personation:  first  when 
Mnesilochus,  at  Euripides'  instigation,  dresses  up 
as  a  woman  to  plead  the  poet's  cause  before  the 
assembly  of  women,  vv.Qoff.,  i85fT. ;  then 
through  the  poet's  own  personation  of  Menelaus 
and  of  Perseus,  vv.87off.,  ioo9ff.  The  asides  of 
Mnesilochus  are  like  those  of  the  trickster  in 
Plautus, 

vv.6o3f.  y.ax.a8at[JL(ov  syw 

V.609     5ioi5(0[xae  =  peril 

his  soliloquy,  vv.765ff.,  like  those  of  Plautus' 
tricksters  bent  upon  some  new  trick, 

otfe  Jt)  Tt5  eaTat  (jLYj^^avtj  (jWTirjptai; ; 

the  sort  of  asides  which  SchaflFner'  says  Plautus 

9  De  aversum  loquendl  ratlone  In,  comoedla  Graeca, 
Diss.  Gissae,  1911,  p.20.  Schaffner  is  probably  Incorrect 
on  this  point,  cf.  remarks  below,  pp.l75f. 


172        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

borrowed  not  from  Menander  of  the  New 
Comedy,  but  from  the  earlier  comedy.  The  con- 
clusion of  the  play,  when  the  chorus  asks  for  the 
approval  of  the  audience,  is  also  like  the  Plautine 
comedies. 

Though  no  conclusion  may  be  drawn  from  the 
coincidence,  it  is  noteworthy  that  this  comedy 
of  Aristophanes  in  which  details  characteristic 
of  the  Plautine  comedies  occur  so  freely  parodies 
three  of  the  tragedies  of  Euripides. 

In  addition  to  the  evidence  already  discussed, 
we  cite  for  the  sake  of  completeness  the  following 
passages  from  Aristophanes :  instances  of  per- 
sonation, Achamians,  vv.iiyff.,  Dicaeopolis 
pretends  to  recognize  Cleisthenes  decked  out  as 
a  eunuch;  Wasps,  v.351,  plan  suggested  to  Phi- 
locleon  by  the  chorus  to  escape  in  the  disguise  of 
a  beggar,  like  Odysseus;  Birds,  vv.Soiff.,  Eu- 
elpides  and  Peisthetaerus  assume  the  characters 
of  birds;  Clouds,  vv.34off.,  cf.  v.355,  the  chorus 
of  women  personating  clouds. 

Frogs  vv.5off.,  Bacchus  assumes  the  garb  of 
Heracles,  to  descend  to  the  infernal  regions  to 
release  Euripides.  His  slaves,  Xanthias,  is  at- 
tired like  Silenus.  It  may  be  urged  that  this  sort 
of  assumption  of  various  characters  by  persons 
of  the  drama  is  not  parallel  to  the  sort  of  per- 
sonation found  in  Plautus.  Nevertheless  Aristo- 
phanes here  foreshadows  the  Plautine  method. 
Thieving  is  found  in  the  Clouds,  v.1499  cf.  497, 
where  Strepsiades  vows  vengeance  upon  So- 
crates, his  master,  for  having  stolen  his  cloak; 
Acharnians,  v.  1023,  where  the  theft  of  oxen  from 


SOURCES   OF   DECEPTION        173 

an  Athenian  farmer  is  intended  to  show  the  hard- 
ships of  the  ordinary  citizen  who  is  at  war,  as 
compared  with  the  happy  lot  of  DicaeopoUs,  who 
is  at  peace;  Knights,  v.79,  one  of  the  characteris- 
tics of  the  Paphlagonian,  Cleon,  is  his  propensity 
for  thieving,  cf.  v.296,  1252,  as  is  the  case  also 
with  the  Sausage-seller,  v.420,  746,  778,  823^?,, 
1203,  which  adds  to  the  comic  effect  of  the  Sau- 
sage-seller's efforts  against  his  rival  the  Paphla- 
gonian to  win  Demus'  favour,  cf.  v.1149;  Lysis- 
trata,  v.  176,  the  women  plan  to  outwit  the  men, 
first  by  seizing  the  Acropolis,  and  then,  as  the 
men,  at  least,  fear,  vv.623f .,  by  stealing  their  hus- 
bands' money ;  Wasps,  two  boys  represent  dogs  in 
the  suit  judged  by  Philocleon,  vv.pooff,  and  the 
slave  Xanthias  plays  dog-accuser;  vv.i49off. 
boys  dressed  as  crabs.  Wasps,  vv.238f.,  354f., 
1 20 1,  stealing  was  one  of  the  favourite  pranks  of 
even  the  stern  administrators  of  the  law,  in  their 
youth;  vv.837ff.  Labes  is  to  be  accused  of  steal- 
ing and  devouring  a  Sicilian  cheese;  Frogs 
vv.772ff.,  Aeacus  as  a  thief-taker  pursues  Xan- 
thias, who  has  stolen  his  dog.  Plots  and  plans 
of  all  sorts  are  found:  Knights,  v.236  the  Paph- 
lagonian accuses  his  rivals  of  constantly  plotting 
ill  to  Demus  and  destruction  to  himself,  cf.vv.257, 
452,  476,  862,  9oiff. ;  the  Sausage-seller,  how- 
ever, works  the  Paphlagonian's  undoing,  in  spite 
of  his  protests,  vv.626ff.,  7S8f . ;  Demus  is  also  de- 
ceived by  both  of  them,  cf.  vv.1142,  I342ff. ; 
Lysistrata,  vv.26ff.  Lysistrata  relates  her  scheme 
for  the  women  to  bring  the  men  to  terms,  cf. 
vv.42,  III,  1007;  Thesmophoriazusae,  vv.765ff., 


174        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Mnesilochus  tries  to  form  some  stratagem  to 
escape  from  the  women  into  whose  power  he 
has  fallen;  Wasps,  v.149,  174&.,  192,  Philo- 
cleon  tries  to  invent  some  means  to  effect 
his  escape  and  to  thwart  his  son's  plots 
against  himself,  vv.345ff. ;  Birds,  vv.i95ff. 
Peisthetaerus  suggests  to  the  birds  his  scheme 
for  them  of  one  great  city,  a  conception  the  de- 
velopment and  realization  of  which^°  occupy  the 
entire  remainder  of  the  play,  cf.  vv.321,  431,  457, 
especially  vv.548ff. ;  Birds,  vv.96off.,  a  prophet 
and  a  surveyor  try  to  hoodwink  Peisthetaerus  but 
he  whips  them  off  the  stage  as  impostors.  Delu- 
sions and  mockeries  occur  in  the  Lysistrata, 
V.840,  the  plots  of  the  women  are  to  be  a  delusion 
and  a  snare  for  their  husbands,  cf .  v.1024 ;  Achar- 
nians  vv.ii97f. 

"If  Dicaeopolis  perceive  me** 
And  mock,  and  mock  at  my  mischances." 

Knights  V.1313  "He  shall  ne'er,  as  our  comman- 
der, fool  it  o'er  this  land  of 
ours." 

Wasps  V.I 007  " —  no  Hyperbolus  delude  and 
mock  you." 

Birds,  vv,328,  333,  the  birds  feel  betrayed  into 
the  hands  of  men  by  the  Hoopoe. 


10  Rogers — translation,    cf.    note  on  v.162. 

11  Rogers' — translation. 


SOURCES   OF   DECEPTION        175 

The  dream  motive  might  also  be  mentioned, 
Knights,  vv.io9oif. ;  Wasps,  vv.i2ff.  The  bur- 
lesque use  of  the  plays  of  Euripides,  as  in  the 
Thesmophoriazusae,  mentioned  above,  and  the 
burlesque  use  of  the  tragic  style  in  the  Acharn- 
ians,  vv.ii74ff.,  foreshadow  the  tragico-comic 
scenes  and  the  passages  of  mock-heroic  style  in 
Plautus. 

Thus  Plautus,  as  we  see,  could  have  borrowed 
many  features  from  the  Old  Comedy;  and  if  we 
judge  the  New  Comedy  by  him  we  may  perhaps 
agree  with  Couat,^^  that  the  Old  Comedy  con- 
tains all  the  germs  of  the  New  Comedy.  Be- 
tween the  two,  however,  the  chief  distinction  lies 
in  the  fact  that  the  vea  "substituted  a  picture  of 
life  for  the  caricature  of  life  of  the  dpx«ca 
preferring  a  laugh  which  sprang  from  likeness  to 
reality  to  one  which  sprang  from  the  strange  and 
bizarre."^^  In  this  respect  Plautus  serves  to 
show  that  the  continuity  between  the  two  is  un- 
broken. In  fact,  as  Leo  has  pointed  out,^*  it  is 
noteworthy  that  some  of  the  plays  which  go  back 
to  Menander  and  Philemon,  as  the  Mercator, 
Trinummus  and  perhaps  the  Epidicus,  show  more 
points  of  contact  with  the  Old  Comedy  than 
others. 

It  has  been  indicated  that  in  the  Thesmo- 
phoriazusae there  may  be  a  connecting-link  be- 
tween Euripides  and  Plautus.     Also  through  Me- 

12  Op.  cit.  p.374. 

13  J.  Denis:  La  Comfidle  QrecQue,  Paris,   1886,  Vol.  II, 
pp.408f. 

14  Plaut.  Porach.  p.  140. 


176        DECEPTION   IN    PLAUTUS 

nander  Plautus  harks  back  to  Menander's  great 
master,  Euripides,^^  who  had  brought  tragedy 
from  its  height  of  mythological  and  heroic  fancy 
to  the  level  of  everyday  life,  combining  with  the 
action  of  the  myth  the  elements  of  involved  in- 
trigue. In  other  words,  Euripides  served  as  the 
forerunner  of  Plautus  in  furnishing  the  transition 
from  tragedy  to  comedy.  In  the  Ion,  the  Helen, 
and  the  Iphigenia  among  the  Taurians,  is  found, 
differentiated  from  comedy  in  tragic  garb  alone, 
the  setting  of  everyday  life  which  is  the  material 
background  of  comedy.  As  Leo  has  suggested,^" 
where  Plautus  is  thus  connected  with  tragedy  it 
is  probable  that  the  threads  which  bind  them  to- 
gether run  through  the  via. 

In  the  use  of  anagnorisis,  for  example,  Euri- 
pides anticipates  the  via,  cf.  the  Electra,  the 
Helen,  the  Ion,  and  the  Iphigenia  among  the 
Taurians  with  the  Epitrepontes  of  Menander  and 
with  the  Captivi  and  the  Poenulus  of  Plautus. 
That  the  use  of  the  avavvwptat?  as  in  the  Peri- 
keiromene  of  Menander,  is  not  a  parody  on 
tragedy  but  a  clear  case  of  the  influence  of 
tragedy  upon  comedy  Leo  has  shown.^^  Other 
motives  also,  as  Leo  has  pointed  out,  are  bor- 
rowed from  tragedy  or  are  a  reflection  of  the 
tragic  conception,  e.  g.  the  arbitration  scene  in 
Menander's  Epitrepontes  is  like  the  judgment 
scene  of  Polymestor  and  Hecuba  before  Aga- 

15  F.     Poland:     Zur    Characteristik    Menanders,     Neue 
Jahrb.   33,   1914,   p.594;   Leo:    R5m,   Lit.  pp.lOOf. 

16  Plaut.  Forsch  p.  113. 

17  G.  G.  N.  1912,  P.281;  ROm.  Lit.   p. 104. 


SOURCES   OF   DECEPTION        177 

memnon  in  the  Hecuba;  or  the  pardon  of  the 
guilty  slave  is  like  the  saving  of  Hypsipyle  by 
Amphiaraos  in  the  Hypsipyle.  Also  we  have 
mentioned  the  fact  that  Plautus  uses  the  Euri- 
pidean  type  of  prologue,  as  in  the  Amphitruo,^* 

Moreover  the  details  of  deception  prominent  in 
Plautus  occur  in  the  tragedies  of  Euripides,  es- 
pecially personation.  In  the  Helen,  the  persona- 
tion of  Helen  by  a  wraith,  etSoXov,  sent  by  Zeus 
to  deceive  Menelaus  and  the  Greek  host,  vv.34, 
559,  704f.,  875,^^  may  prefigure  the  use  of  per- 
sonation in  comedy.  Also  Menelaus  pretends 
"in  name"  to  die,  w.io5off.,  cf.  v.  1064  the  pre- 
tense, iQ  axiQ^t;.  In  the  Rhesus,  vv,2o8flF.,  the 
SoXoq  of  Dolon's  disguise  as  a  wolf  is  outlined 
in  full  to  the  chorus,  as  a  preparation  for  his 
carrying  out  of  the  ruse,  and  the  chorus  repeats 
the  plot  in  vv.253ff.  Odysseus  also  appears  in 
the  guise  of  a  beggar,  v. 503,  cf .  Hecuba  vv.239ff . ; 
and  Athena  personates  Cypris  in  order  to  deceive 
Paris,  V.638.  In  the  Bacchanals,  Pentheus  mas- 
querades as  a  woman  at  Dionysus'  orders, 
w.82oflF.2° 

Lies  occur  throughout  the  plays,  e.  g.  the  lie  of 
Hecuba  to  Polymestor,  in  Hecuba  vv.ioo2ff.,  to 
lure  him  to  his  death  in  the  tents  of  the  Trojan 
women.     In  the  Iphigenia  at  Aulis,  Agamemnon 

18  G.  Frantz:  De  Comoediae  Atticae  Prologls,  Diss. 
Strassburg,  1891,  p.40. 

19  Citations  from  Euripides,  Way- translation,  Loeb  Clas- 
sical Library. 

20  cf.  Homer,  personation  of  a  fleeing  Trojan  by  Apollo, 
Iliad  XXII. 


178        DECEPTION   IN   PLAUTUS 

lies  to  Clytemnestra  about  the  proposed  betrothal 
of  Iphigenia  to  Achilles,  and  his  plot  is  frustrated 
by  the  meeting  of   Clytemnestra   and  Achilles, 

VV.820ff. 

Disregard  of  time,  which  was  noted  in  Aristo- 
phanes and  Plautus,  is  found  in  Euripides,  e.  g, 
in  the  Children  of  Heracles,  where  within  the 
space  of  a  hundred  lines  Capreus,  the  herald  goes 
to  Argos  from  Athens,  gathers  a  host  and 
returns  with  them ;  and  a  battle  is  fought  and  won 
within  the  space  of  thirty-five  lines.  But  this 
feature  is  common  to  all  the  tragedies.  The 
dream  motive,  too,  is  a  connecting-link  between 
tragedy  and  Plautus,  through  the  vea.^^ 

Plots  of  various  sorts,  deceits,  Ts^vat,  are 
found  throughout  the  Euripides,  cf. 

Hipp.  V.670     Ttvas  vuv  Te^va?  e'xoSJ^ev  tq  X6yo«? 

V.680    Ou  /.aTwpOcoTat  ts^vt] 

V.745     So9tXo[i.a{   8s  /.(ZTCt  Tolfft  (piXtcctok; 

Iph.  T.  V.24      y,at    [jl'    QSuaaeo?    Tsxvat    [Lriipoq 

xapstXovTO 

Ale.  V.32       AoXtae?  -cexvatai  "/^pricaiiBvoq 

V.786     To    zriq    Tuxif]?    £<7t'  6u     8t5a/,i;6v 
oyS'  aXtffxetat  ts^vt) 

Iph.  T.  V.1032  Aetvat   yap    at  •^\j'^at,v,6<i    suptdxetv 
Ts^va? 

21  Leo:  Plaut.  Porsch.  pp.l62ff. 


SOURCES   OF   DECEPTION        179 

The  Cyclops,  the  only  extant  Satyric  drama,  is 
particularly  like  the  Plautine  comedies.  This 
might  be  expected,  considering  its  farcical  nature. 
Silenus,  wtih  his  wiles  and  his  lies,  vv.292fF.,  is 
very  like  the  crafty  slave  of  Plautus;  Odysseus, 
with  his  ready  wit,  v.476,  reminds  one  of  the  in- 
triguing trickster.     The  despairing  note  of  v.668 

XopO(; 

Kuy.Xwt}*  axoXoiJLrjv 

sounds  the  oft  repeated  perii  of  the  Plautine 
comedies.  Had  we  more  of  the  satyr  dramas  as 
a  basis  for  comparison  we  might  find,  as  we  are 
tempted  to  believe,  that  Plautus  drew  largely, 
though  probably  indirectly,  from  them.  At  all 
events  he  seems  certainly  to  be  indebted,  directly 
or  more  probably  indirectly,  to  Euripides  for  ele- 
ments in  the  plots  of  deception. 

Further  instances  of  the  elements  of  deception, 
which  enter  into  the  plays  of  Euripides,  may  be 
cited  for  the  sake  of  completeness : — 

Andr.  vv.62f 5etva  y*P  ^ouXsueTat 

MevsXao?  ei?  ae  xatg  6,'  ,    .    . 

67     .     .     .    xoea?    iJLYixava?    icXsxouatv 

435     •  •  •  *  86X^  p.'  uxT)X6si;'  iQTcaTiQii.e0a 

549     .    .    .    .   Tt  icpa(j(T6T'  ^xptTa  |tiQxa- 
v(i)[Aevot ; 


i8o        DECEPTION   IN    PLAUTUS 

V.995  Orestes  vows  by  his  plots  to  ruin 
Achilles'  son.  Madness  of  Heracles,  v.8o, 
Megara  appeals  to  Amphitryon  to  devise  some 
means  for  her  escape  from  Lycus,  whose  ruin  he 
plans,  vv.729f.,  cf,  v.  855  for  the  interference  of 
the  gods  in  their  schemes;  Iph.  Aul.  v.745, 
Agamemnon  confesses  his  plots  against  Clytem- 
nestra  and  Iphigenia;  Rhesus  v.125,  Aeneas  urges 
sending  someone  to  spy  upon  the  enemy's  lines, 
cf.  V.140,  a  task  which  Dolon  accepts,  vv.i54ff., 
to  his  undoing,  for  he  is  trapped  by  Odysseus 
and  Diomedes,  who  learn  his  plans,  and  who  take 
advantage  of  that  knowledge  to  destroy  Rhesus, 
V.861 ;  Hecuba  v.87off.,  Hecuba  reveals  to  Aga- 
memnon her  plot  to  kill  Polymestor,  which  she 
carries  out,  w.978flF. ;  Medea  vv.26off.,  Medea 
plans  vengeance  upon  Jason  and  his  new  bride, 
her  rival,  cf.  vv.317,  372fF.,  402flF. ;  Helen 
vv,8i3ff.,  io33ff.,  Helen  plans  her  escape  and  that 
of  Menelaus;  Electra  vv.582,  620,  Orestes  plots 
Aegisthus'  death,  which  he  accomplishes, 
vv.83off. ;  Orestes,  v.  1099,  Orestes  and  Pylades 
plan  Menelaus'  downfall,  and  Hermione's,  v.1212 ; 
lies,  Iph.  T.  vv.ii55ff.,  Iphigenia  invents  answers 
to  Thoas'  questions  as  to  the  reasons  for  her  re- 
moval of  Athena's  statue  from  the  temple; 
Electra  vv.65off.,  Electra  lures  Clytemnestra  to 
visit  her  by  lies ;  Ion  vv.825f . 

"So  not  the  God  hath  lied, 
but  this  man  hed,^^ 

22  Way's  translation.    Loeb  series. 


SOURCES   OF   DECEPTION        i8i 

Rearing  so  long  the  lad,  weav- 
ing such  plots." 

Cyclops  vv.259f.        "All  that  he's  said  to  you 
was  one  big  lie 
To    excuse   his    selling  your 
goods  on  the  sly." 

mockery,  and  delusion  resulting  from  the  plots 
above  mentioned, 

Iph.  Aul.  V.849  tow?  ex,spT6[JLYjcre  xai^s  v.<x\  ai  tt?. 
Helen  v.586  Paris  is  baffled  by  Helen's  wraith, 
cf.  VV.683,  704f.,  1621 ;  Thieving,  Iph.  Aul.  v.315, 
Agamemnon's  letter,  which  revealed  all  his  plot, 
is  stolen  by  Menelaus  from  the  messenger,  cf. 
VV.327,  895 ;  pretense, 

Iph.  Aul.  V.884  "the    marriage    made    the    pre- 
text"23 

Helen  v.  1064  "fruitless  is  thy  pretense" 
Medea  vv.87off.,  Medea  pretends  that  all  her  for- 
mer anger  and  threats  against  Jason  were  mere 
whim;  Helen  v.1064.  The  use  of  letters  and  of 
dreams  should  also  be  noted : — letters  in  Iph.  Aul. 
vv.3i5ff. ;  Iph.  T.  vv.767ff. ;  Hipp.  vv.856ff. ; 
dreams  in  Rhesus  v.782 ;  Hecuba  vv.72ff . ;  Iph. 
T.  vv.42flF.  But  it  should  be  carefully  noted  that, 
although  the  same  elements  as  are  found  in  Plau- 
tus  occur  also  in  Euripides,  as  is  evident  from 
these  citations,  and  in  Aristophanes,  as  was  noted 

23  Way's  translation. 


i82        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

above,  deception  is  not  the  centre  of  interest  nor 
of  primary  importance  in  these  two  writers.^* 

For  the  vsa,  in  the  comedies  of  Menander,  de- 
ception of  the  exact  sort  used  by  Plautus  in  the 
Truculentus  is  found  in  the  Epitrepontes, 
vv.296ff.,  where  Habrotonon  plans  that  she  will 
pretend  to  be  the  mother  of  the  child,  as  Phrone- 
sium,  the  meretrix,  does  in  the  Plautine  play, 
though  with  different  intent.^^  Moreover  other 
similarities  exist,  in  that  Habrotonon  is  apparent- 
ly a  meretrix,  v.io;  at  least,  she  is  a  fidicina, 
V.601  K,  cf.  V.I,  and  Onesimus,  a  slave,  is  her 
colleague  and  abettor  in  the  plot,  which  is  the 
same  sort  of  intrigue  upon  which  the  slaves  in 
some  of  the  Plautine  comedies  enter,  cf.  v.318  of 
the  Epitrepontes.  In  fact,  in  the  Epitrepontes 
all  the  action  depends  upon  the  fact  that  the 
tricky  slave  accidentally  sees  a  ring  which  had 
belonged  to  his  master.^^  With  Plautus,  how- 
ever, the  feature  of  deception,  as  has  been  seen, 
is  often  emphasized  by  the  sacrifice  of  the  com- 
plications which  gave  the  excuse  for  the  decep- 
tion, i.  e.  the  love  intrigue.  All  that  can  be  ab- 
solutely certain  is  that  the  plot  of  the  Epitre- 
pontes consists  apparently  of  the  sentimental  in- 
trigue plus  the  dvaYVuptat?. 


24  Prescott,  Class  Ph.,  XIII  (1918),  113ff.— an  article 
which  I  was  able  to  read  only  after  this  dissertation  was 
completed. 

25  cf.  the  recogrnition  that  this  was  a  common  ruse,  Capt. 
vv.1030-1031. 

26  Legrand:  Daos,  p.395. 


SOURCES   OF   DECEPTION        183 

In  the  Perinthia^'^  some  plot  is  apparently  being 
formed,  though  to  what  end  it  is  impossible  to 
determine.  As  to  the  personation  hinted  at  in 
the  Epitrepontes,  it  is  probable  that  Plautus 
adopted  the  detail  from  the  vea,  with  the  change 
in  emphasis  which  has  been  noted.  In  persona- 
tion Plautus  harks  back,  through  Menander,  to 
Euripides,  if  we  accept  the  conclusion  drawn  by 
A.  Sehrt^*  from  a  comparison  of  the  Epitrepontes 
with  the  Helen  of  Euripides.  And  the  Euripi- 
dean  use  of  this  feature  in  other  plays  has  been 
indicated  above.  And  yet  we  must  not  forget 
the  tradition  of  this  element  within  comedy  itself, 
cf.  Aristophanes. 

In  the  fragments  of  the  New  Comedy,  Kock's 
edition,  Menander, 

frag.  14  6  TcpoTo;  ebpid^  StaTpo^r^v,  xxto^^  tsxvyjv 
TCoXXou?  sxotiQffsv  aSXtou?  axXouv  yap  -^v 
Tov  pLT)  8uva[i,evov  J^'^v  aXuTccix;  aicoOavetv 

may  refer  to  some  parasite's  or  trickster's  means 
of  gaining  a  livelihood,  cf.  also  Menander's  Ko- 
lax,  vv.5of,,2^  cf.  and  the  fragment  of  the  Anti- 
phanes, 

243-244  K.  Bto?  Gswv  YO!p  sTTtv  OTav  exr]?   tuoOsv. 
TaXXoTpta  SetxveTv  {jlyj  icpoaexwv  Xoyta- 
{/.acrtv. 

B.  pLax.aptO(;6  p(oc;.  Sei  |jl'  'aet  xatvov  i:6pov 
eupsiv  Zztaq  [xaarjixa  tat?  YvaSot?  e^w. 

27  Koerte:   Menandrea,   p.l95,   vv.llff. 

28  De  Menandro  Euripldis  imitatore,  Gissae,   1912,  p.24. 

29  Koerte:  Menandrea,  p.181. 


i84        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

But  without  more  of  the  context  it  is  impossible 
to  determine  whether  the  word  "ziyvfi  in  these 
citations  admits  of  such  a  specific  rendering  as 
"trick." 

Apart  from  the  fragments  of  the  plays  of 
Menander  just  mentioned,  we  have  only  the  he- 
terogeneous collections  of  citations  from  the 
Middle  and  New  Comedy^"  from  which  to  make 
our  comparisons.  Inasmuch  as  these  consist 
largely  of  philosophical  sententiae  quoted  by  Sto- 
baeus  in  his  dvOoXoYtov  v.a\  sx,XoYat,  of  passages 
appropriate  to  the  Ae[TCVoaO(ptaTdt  of  Athenaeus, 
to  whom  we  owe  the  majority  of  the  fragments, 
and  of  single  lines  and  phrases  and  words  quoted 
by  the  grammarians,  it  is  perhaps  not  surprising 
that  an  examination  of  them  yields  no  other  in- 
stances which  might  serve  as  parallels,  even  thus 
remote,  to  any  details  of  Plautine  trickery. 

To  be  sure,  Menander  493  K 

yigo)"^  Q!'jre[ji.£[JiuxT'  aOXioi;  X6/A901; 

is  parallel  to  Terence,  Phormio, 

V.682     Emunxi  argento  senes 

except  for  the  very  important  omission  of  the 
detail  of  money.     It  is,  however,  impossible  to 

soKock  ed.  Vol.  II  (1884)  Vol.  Ill  (1888);  Koerte:  Men- 
andrea,  1910;  H.  van  Herwerden:  Collectanea  critica,  epi- 
crltica,  exegetica,  slve  addenda  ad  T.  Kockii  opus  com. 
Att.  frg.  1903;  J.  Demianczyk:  Supplementum  comicorum 
Comoedia  Greacae  fragmenta  post  editlonem  Kockianum, 
Abhandl.  Krakau  Akad.   1912,  pp.203-382. 


SOURCES   OF   DECEPTION        185 

say  whether  the  Greek  is,  like  the  Latin,  a  sum- 
ming up  of  the  successful  accomplishment  of  a 
ruse  worked  out  by  the  speaker,  or  whether  it  is 
a  mere  statement  of  the  confused  state  of  the 
Yspwv  under  other  circumstances.  Moreover,  in 
view  of  the  vast  number  of  fragments,  the 
scarcity  of  parallels  probably  means  that  decep- 
tion in  the  vea  was  relatively  much  rarer  than  in 
the  Roman  palliata. 

In  a  general  way,  as  Legrand  points  out,^^  a 
comedy  of  the  new  period  represents  the  work- 
ing out  of  a  precarious  situation  to  a  definite  con- 
clusion. And  the  strength  of  the  vea^^  lay  in  the 
artistic  combination  of  such  involved  and  excit- 
ing action  with  a  subtle  portrayal  of  character, 
wherein  the  denouement  was  brought  about  part- 
ly through  chance,  partly  through  intrigue,  or 
through  the  peculiarities  or  contrasts  in  the 
character  of  the  personae  dramatis.  For  Me- 
nander  and  his  imitators,^'  character  became  the 
chief  interest,  and  their  originality  consists  in 
perfecting  the  action  and  intrigue  and  in  trans- 
ferring to  comedy  the  customs  and  passions 
which,  so  far  as  they  were  based  on  literature, 
seemed  up  to  that  time  to  have  been  reserved 
for  tragedy.  Their  chief  source  was  life.  In 
general,  Plautus  as  well  as  Terence  continues  this 
tradition. 

31  Daos,   p.376. 

32  Christ:  Geschlchte  der  griechlsclien  Literatur,  I. 
MUUer's  Handbuch,  Vol.  VII  2,  1.  p.27.  This  tendency 
probably  began  In  the  [isat]. 

33  J.  Denis:  La  Com^die  Qrecque,  II  p.403. 


i86        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

From  the  indications  of  connection  which  we 
have  mentioned,  it  may  be  concluded  that,  in 
general,  deception  of  some  sort  figured  in  the 
vea,  though  the  familiar  plot  of  epo)?  xat  Sia^Oopa 
TcapOevou  followed  by  avaYvopiai?  is  the  chief  fea- 
ture of  the  vsa  as  illustrated,  at  least,  by  the  plays 
of  Menander.^*  Yet  as  has  been  seen  in  the  Epi- 
trepontes,  the  element  of  deception  enters  in,  in 
the  special  guise  of  pretense  and  lying. 

Further  traces  of  deception  can  be  followed 
back  to  the  ap/octa  and  even  to  tragedy,  especial- 
ly the  tragedy  of  Euripides.  The  presence  of 
many  details  of  deception  disclosed  by  our  analy- 
ses in  the  comedies  of  Plautus  is  explainable, 
then,  as  derived  either  from  comedies  of  the  vea 
still  undiscovered,  or  as  introduced  and  increased 
in  number  and  in  relative  importance  indepen- 
dently by  Plautus,  after  he  had  learned  the 
methods  of  the  vsa. 

There  is  one  other  possibility,  that  of  the  deri- 
vation of  deception  from  the  Atellana.  The 
connection  between  Plautus  and  the  Atellana  has 
been  discussed  by  Leo,^^  especially  for  the 
Casina,  in  which  vv.902-914  resemble  Pomponius 
v.57  R,  V.67  R,  which  deal  with  masquerading. 
Deception  in  the  form  of  personation,  therefore, 
was  present  in  the  Atellana;  cf,  also  two  cita- 
tions from  Pomponius  and  Novius,  who  though 
later  than  Plautus  may  reproduce  in  literary  form 

34  cf.  the  Hero  and  Perlkeiromene ;   Leo:   R5m.   Lit.   I 

p.l02f. 

35  Die  Plautlnlschen  Cantlca,  pp.l04ff. 


SOURCES   OF   DECEPTION        187 

the  earlier  unwritten  farces:^®  Pomponius,  Sar- 
cularia,^^ 

Alter  amat  potat  prodigit,  patrem  suppilat  semper 

which  may  imply  some  such  schemes  for  stealing 
money  from  the  patrem  as  the  adulescentes  and 
servi  of  Plautus  indulge  in,^*  since  sup  pilar  e,  ac- 
cording to  Nonius  13,  I  means  hivolare  vel  ra- 
pere,  a  pilorum  raptu;  Novius,  Decuma  IP^ 

Me  non  vocabit;  ob  earn  rem  hanc  feci  fallam 

in  which  according  to  Nonius  109,  19  fallam  is 
used  for  fallaciam.  But  since  the  Atellana  in  its 
literary  form  is  later  that  the  palliata,  it  is  quite 
possible  that  these  resemblances  are  due  to  the 
influence  of  the  latter,  and  not  to  independent 
tradition  from  the  preliterary  Atellana. 

The  presence,  therefore,  of  so  many  details  of 
the  Plautine  technique  of  deception  in  the  Greek 
also, — tragedy,  Old  and  New  Comedy,  admits  of 
the  possibility  of  the  adoption  of  them  by  Plautus 
from  any  or  all  Greek  forerunners,  but  does  not 
prove  such  adoption.  Whether  Plautus  was  a 
translator   and    adapter,    after   the    pattern    set 


36  cf.    Ribbeck:     Scaenicae     Romanorum    Poesls    Frag- 
menta,  1897. 

37  Ibid,  p.301. 

38  Ibid,  p.310. 

38  But  the  line  applies  better  to  ordinary  pilfering,   cf. 
suPpilare  in  the  Menaechmi. 


i88        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

by  Naevius,  as  Leo  argues,*"  his  creative 
genius  shaping  merely  the  dialogue  and 
not  the  plot  of  the  comedies,*^  "which 
in  their  carefully  worked  out  intrigue 
merely  follow  the  type  characteristic  of  the  New 
Comedy,  or  whether  Plautus  subordinated  the 
literary  Attic  form  to  the  burlesque,  mirth-mak- 
ing sketches  of  Roman  daily  life  and  interming- 
led with  them  features  from  the  Samnite  folk- 
drama,  which  in  their  Roman-Italian  atmosphere 
display  that  closeness  to  Aristophanes  which 
Cicero  felt"*^  it  is  impossible  to  decide.  But  it 
is  evident,  considering  the  predominance  of 
trickery  in  all  the  comedies  of  Plautus  and  its 
subordination  or  entire  absence  in  all  the 
available  Greek  sources,  as  has  been  seen,  that 
Plautus  makes  trickery  the  chief  interest  in  his 
plots,  regardless  of  its  relative  unimportance  in 
his  originals. 

The  present  investigation  of  these  originals  has 
proved  that  the  plot  of  trickery  did  not  come  in 
toto  from  them  as  can  be  judged  from  the  extant 
fragments.  To  the  objection  which  may  be  raised 
that  Plautus  may  have  selected  from  the  hun- 
dreds of  Greek  plays  at  his  disposal  those  which 
made  this  element  prominent,  we  can  only  say 
that  the  non-existence  of  such  plays  at  present 
makes  the  proof  of  that  assertion  impossible.  In 
view  of  the  thousands  of  Greek  fragments  the 


40  R5m.  Lit.  pp.lOSfE. 

41  Leo:  Plaut.  Forsch.  p.lOl;  p.l65. 

42Cic.  de  off.  I  104,  quoted  by  Leo:  R5m.  Lit.  pp.l36f. 


SOURCES   OF    DECEPTION        189 

argument  ex  silentio  seems  strong.  From  the 
Greek  he  certainly  adapted  to  his  own  use,  vary- 
ing them  to  suit  his  mood  and  his  anticipation  of 
the  humour  of  his  audience,  love  scenes,  toilet 
scenes,  dialogues  between  slaves,  parasites  and 
cooks,  banquet  scenes  and  the  like,  as  the 
outer  structure  barely  covering  the  evident 
framework  beneath.*^  Plautus'  method  in 
this  choice  and  his  arrangement  of  the 
various  features  has  been  shown  in  the  analy- 
ses,— the  fact  that  trickery,  as  a  plot,  can  be 
traced  throughout  most  of  the  plays,  discarding 
such  incidental  scenes  as  serve  merely  as  the 
outer  padding.  The  poet's  art,  as  Leo  in- 
timates,** is  manifest  in  his  success  in  making 
the  action,  with  the  addition  of  these  extraneous 
scenes,  poetically  and  theatrically  probable. 

His  failure  to  do  so  in  all  cases,  as  illustrated 
by  the  plays  in  which  threads  of  trickery  are 
dropped,  is  attributable  to  the  playwright's  con- 
centration upon  the  plot  of  deception  and  his 
disregard  for  minor  details.  Except  in  the  Epi- 
dicus,  which  offers  the  greatest  obscurities  in  plot, 
the  resulting  inconsistencies  are  not  vital  to  the 
progress  of  the  trickery.  In  general  the  dis- 
crepancies are  such  as  would  probably  pass  un- 
noticed in  a  single  rendering  of  a  play  before  an 
audience  whose  object  was  merely  to  be  enter- 
tained. We  can  believe  that  Plautus  worked 
merely  to  meet  that  demand*^  and  so  led  on  the 

43  Leo:  Plaut.  Forsch.  p. 2 10. 

44  R6m.  Lit.  p.105. 

46  Leo:  Rem.  Lit.  p.l09. 


ipo        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

action  in  his  plays  from  one  amusing  incident  to 
the  next,  interspersing  scenes  borrowed  from 
Greek  comedy  with  farcical  elements  in  the  form 
of  deception  and  the  like,  and  joining  past, 
present  and  future  action  as  coherently  as  it 
might  be  found  in  everyday  happenings.  Many 
things  of  the  day  prevent  the  accomplishment  of 
plans  of  the  past  and  necessitate  entirely  diverg- 
ent plans  for  the  future.  Comedy  is  and  always 
will  be  a  "picture  of  life."  The  inconsistencies 
of  life  must  necessarily  be  mirrored  in  the  copy. 
The  physchological  improbabilities  which  Langen 
reiterates  so  frequently  could  often  be  brought  as 
an  accusation  against  the  everyday  course  of 
human  events.  Moreover,  many  of  the  incon- 
sistencies in  the  Latin  comedies  already  occur  in 
the  Greek  models.*^  No  sequence  of  logical 
premise  and  conclusion  controls  with  fixed  rule 
the  actions  of  the  puppets  which  play  upon  the 
stage  of  life.  Why  demand  such  logical  sequence 
then  in  the  actions  of  the  pretenders  at  life  on 
the  stage  of  comedy? 

To  the  Romans  the  machinations  of  a  slave 
were  just  as  interesting  as  to  their  ancestors  the 
wiles  of  Ulysses  or  of  Sinon.^^  Plautus  com- 
bined in  his  comedies,*^  as  has  already  been 
stated,  the  literary  Attic  form  and  plot  with  de- 
tails and  customs  of  Roman  daily  life,  and  stands 
forth  as  the  connecting  link  between  the  New 

46  Legrand:  Daos,  pp.399,  407,  409. 

47  Legrand:  Daos,  p.401. 

48  Leo:  Rem.  Lit.  p.l40. 


SOURCES   OF    DECEPTION        191 

Comedy  and  the  world  literature  of  modem 
times.*®  Plautus'  creative  genius  appears  in  the 
way  in  which  he  met  the  demands  of  the  vis 
comica.'^^  Without  violating  in  too  open  a 
fashion  the  reality  of  roles  and  situations,  he  per- 
formed the  full  duty  of  the  dramatist^^  of  making 
his  audience  understand  the  events  which  took 
place,  in  their  due  relations,  and  of  amusing  and 
entertaining  them. 

49  Ibid,  p.149. 

50  Leo:   Plaut.  Porsch.  p.lOl. 

51  Legrand:  Daos,  p.490. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Editions  of  Plautus 

Brix-Niemeyer : — i  Trinummus,  1907. 

2  Captivi,  1910. 

3  Menaechmi,  1912. 

4  Miles  Gloriosus,  1901. 

Goetz  G.  and  F.  Schoell  and  G.  Loewe:  Ed. 

mai.,  Leipzig,  1871-1902. 
Goetz  G.  and  F.  Schoell:  Ed.  min.,  Leipzig, 

1 892- 1 904, 
Gray  J.  H. :  Epidicus,  ed.  Cambridge,  1893. 
Leo  F.,  Berlin,  1895-96. 
Lindsay  W.  M.,  Oxford,  1904-05. 
Lorenz  O.  F. :  Bd.  II  Mostellaria,  2d  ed.  Ber- 
lin, 1883. 
„  III  Miles  Gloriosus,  2d  ed. 

Berlin,  1886. 
„  IV  Pseudolus,  Berlin,  1876. 
Ussing  F.,  Copenhagen,  1875-92. 

Greek — for  the  New  Comedy,  Aristophanes  and 
Euripides 

Capps   E. :   Four   Plays   of   Menander,   New 
York,  1910. 

193 


194        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Christ    W.    V. :    Geschichte    der    griechischen 

Literatur,  I.  Miiller's  Handbuch,  Vol.  VII  2, 

I,  Munich,  191 1. 
Couat  A.:  Aristophane  et  I'Ancienne  Comedie 

Attique,  Paris,  1899. 
Croiset    M. :    L'Histoire    de    la    Litterature 

Grecque,  Vol.  Ill,  Paris,  1899. 
Demianczyk    J.:    Supplementum    comicorum 

comoediae  Graecae  f  ragmenta  post  editionem 

Kockianum,  Abhandl.  Krakau  Akad.  1912, 

pp.  203-382. 
Denis  J. :  La  Comedie  Grecque,  Vol.  II,  Paris, 

1886. 
Dziatzko   K. :    Der   Inhalt    des    Georgos    von 

Menander,  Rh.  M.  LV  1900,  pp.  io4ff. 

:  Heauton  timorumenos,  Rh.  M. 

Vol.  XXVII,  1072,  pp.  i59ff. 

:  Uber  den  Truculentus  prolog  des 

Plautus,  Rh.  M.  Vol.  XXIX,  1874,  pp.  siflF. 
Frankel  E. :  De  media  et  nova  comoedia  quaes- 

tiones.  Diss,  Gottingen,  1912. 
Frantz  G. :  De  comoedia  Atticae  prologis,  Diss. 

Strassburg,  1891. 
Grenfell  and  Hunt:  A  Revised  Text  of  the 

Geneva  Fragment,  Oxford,  1898. 
Kock  F. :  Comiconmi  Atticorum  Fragmenta, 

3  vols.,  Leipzig,  1888. 
Koerte  A. :  Menandrea,  Leipzig,  1910. 
Legrand  P-E. :  Daos,  Paris,  19 10. 

:  Pour  I'histoire  de  la  Comedie 

Nouvelle,  Rev.  d'et.  gr.,  16,  1903,  pp.  349- 

374. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  195 

Poland  F. :  Zur  Charakteristik  Menanders, 
Neue  Jahrb.  33,  1914,  pp.  sSsfF. 

Rogers  B.  B. :  Aristophanes,  translations,  1902- 
1916. 

Schaffner  O, :  De  aversum  loquendi  ratione  in 
Comoedia  Graeca,  Diss.,  Gissae,  191 1. 

Sehrt  A.:  De  Menandro  Euripidis  imitatore 
Diss.  Gissae,  1912. 

Van  Herwerden  H. :  Collectanea  critica,  epi- 
critica,  exegetica,  sive  addenda  ad  F.  Kockii 
opus  comicorum  Atticorum  fragmentorum, 
1903. 

Way  A.  S. :  Euripides,  translations,  Loeb  clas- 
sics, 1912. 

Latin — for  Plautus 

Ahrens   P.:   De  Plauti  Asinaria,   Diss,  Jena, 

1907. 
Anspach  A. :  De  Bacchidum  Plautinae  retrac- 

tatione  scaenica,  Diss.,  Bonn,  1882. 
Baar  J. :  De  Bacchidibus  Plautina  quaestiones, 

Diss.,  Miinster,  1891. 
Bierma  J.  W. :  Quaestiones  de  Plautina  Pseu- 

dolo.  Diss.  Groningen,  1897. 
Boissier  G. :  Quomodo  Graecos  poetas  Plautus 

transtulerit,  Paris,  1857. 
Brasse  M. :  Quatenus  in  fabulis  Plautinis  et 

loci  et  temporis  unitatibus  species  veritatis 

neglegetur,  Diss.,  Breslau,  1914. 
Coulter  C.  C. :  Retractatio  in  Plautus,  Diss., 

Bryn  Mawr,  191 1. 
Francken  C.  M.:  Plautina,  Mnem.  VII,  1879, 

pp.  i84ff. 


196        DECEPTION    IN    PLAUTUS 

Franke  J. :  De  Militis  Gloriosi  Plautinae  com- 

positione,  Diss.,  Langenfeld,  1910. 
Fuhrmann  C. :  Zu   Plautus  Casina,  Jahrb.  f . 

Philol.  99,  1869,  pp.  482  f. 
Goetz  G. :  Ind.  lect.  Jena,  1883. 
Hasper  T. :  Ad  Epidicum  Plautinam  coniec- 

tanea,  Dresden,  1882. 
Havet  L. :   Plautus,  Rev.   de  Phil.    16,   1892, 

pp.72-78. 
Jachmann  G. :  Xapixe?,  Festschrift  fur  Fried- 
rich  Leo,  Die  Komposition  des  Plautinischea 

Poenulus,  191 1,  pp.  24g&. 
Karsten    H.    J. :    De    Compositione    Poenuli, 

Mnem.  XXIX,  1901,  pp.  3631^. 

:    De      Interpolationibus      in 

Plauti      Captivis,      Mnem,      XXI,      1893, 

pp.289ff. 
Ladewig  Th. :  Uber  den  Kanon  des  Volcatius 

Sedigitus,  Neustrelitz,  1849. 

:    Zum    Epidicus    des    Plautus, 

Zeitschr.  f.  Alter.  1841,  coll.  1079-1099. 
Langen  P. :  Plautinische  Studien,  Berlin,  1886. 
Langrehr  G. :  De  Plauti  Curculione,  Friedland, 

1893- 
Leo  F. :  Der  Monolog  in  Drama,  Abhandl.  d. 

konig.  gesell.  Gott.  1908,  N.  F.  X  No.  5. 

:  Die  Plautinische  Cantica,  Abhandl.  d. 
konig.  gesell.  Gott.  1898,  N.  F.  I  No.  7. 

:  Geschichte  der  romischen  Literatur, 
Vol.  I,  Berlin,  191 3. 

:  Lectiones  Plautinae,  Hermes  XVIII, 
pp.  558ff. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  197 

:  Plautinsche  Forschungen,  2d  ed. 
Berlin,  1912. 

:  Satyros  Bto?  EuptxtSou,  G.  G.  N.  1912, 
pp.  273ff- 

:Uber  den  Stichus  des  Plautus,  G.  G. 
N.  1902,  pp.  375ff. 

:  Uber  den  Pseudolus  des  Plautus,  G. 

G.  N.  1903,  pp.  347ff. 
Lindsay  W.  M. :  Bericht  iiber  Plautus-litera- 

tur,  Bursian's  Jahresbericht,  1914,  Part  II. 
Norden  E. :  Die  romische  Literatur  in  Einlei- 

tung  in   die  Altertumwissenschaft,   Vol.   I, 

1910. 
Loewe  G. :  Analecta  Plautina,  1877. 
Mesk  J. :  Die  Komposition  des  Plautinischen 

Miles,  Wiener  Studien,  1913,  pp.  21  iff. 
Meyer  M. :  De  Plauti  Persa,  Comm.  Phil.  Jena, 

8,  1907,  pp.  I45ff. 
Polczyk  A. :  De  unitatibus  et  loci  et  temporis 

in   Nova  Comoedia  observatis,   Diss.,  Via- 

drina  Uratislaviensi,  1909. 
Prescott  H.  W. :  The  Interpretation  of  Roman 

Comedy,  Class.  Phil.,  XI  No.  2,  April  1916, 

pp.   I25ff. ;  XII   No.  4,  October  1917,  pp. 

405ff. 
Reinhardt  L. :  De  retractatis  fabulis  Plautinis, 

Studemund's       Studien,       Berlin,        1873, 

pp.  io9ff. 

:  Die  Uberarbeitung  des  Plautin- 
ischen Epidicus,  Jahrb.  f.  Philol.  in,  1875, 

pp.  I94ff. 
Ribbeck  O. :  Alazon,  Leipzig,  1882. 


198        DECEPTION   IN   PLAUTUS 

Schanz  M. :  Geschichte  der  romischen  Litera- 

tur,  I.  Miiller's  Handbuch  VIII  I  i,  Munich, 

1907. 
Schmidt    F. :    Miles    Gloriosus    des    Plautus, 

Jahrb,  f.  Philol.  Suppl.  IX,  1877,  pp.  3231?. 
Schmitt  A.:  De  PseudoU  Plautinae  exemplo 

Attico,  Strassburg,  1909. 
Schredinger   C. :   Observationes   in   T.   Macci 

Plauti  Epidicum,  Munich,  1884. 
Seyffert  O. :  Bericht  iiber  Plautus,  Bursian's 

Jahresbericht,  1895,  Part  II. 

:  Zur  Uberlieferungsgeschichte  der 

Komodies   des   Plautus,   Berl.   Phil.   Woch. 

XVI,  1896,  coll.  252ff.,  283ff. 
Sonnenburg    E. :    De    Menaechmis    Plautina, 

Bonn,  1882. 
Teuffel    W. :    Studien    und    Charakteristiken, 

Leipzig,  1889. 
Van  Ijsendyk  A. :  De  T.  Macci  Plauti  Persa, 

Utrecht,  1884. 
Weber  H. :  Plautusstudien,  Philogus  57,  1898, 

pp.  231  ff. 
Wheeler  A.  L. :  The  Plot  of  the  Epidicus,  A. 

J.  P.  Vol.  XXXVIII  No.  3,  1917,  pp.236- 

264. 
Wilamowitz  v.  Moellendorf  U. :  Der  Landmann 

des  Menandros,  Neue  Jahrb,  1899,  pp.  51  iff. 

:  De  tribus  car- 
minibus  Latinis,  Index  schol.  Gott.  1893-4, 

pp.  i3ff- 


y^  ^J-<^ 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


CENTRAL  UNIVERS         a    qOO  807  870    1 

ITnivor«itv  nf  r.9lifni...«.    »><»•  uiRirii 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGiONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hilgard  Avenue,  Los  Angeies,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  It  was  borrowed. 


JAN  1  6  200f 

QUARTER  LOAN 
DtU  13  RtC'D 


